This is my first package.

I would like to add it to EPEL7, F27, F28, F29, and Rawhide.

 - Use a more meaningful name for your archive:

Source0:        https://%{provider_prefix}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

 - Add a comment above the patch describing why it is needed.

 - You should unbundle the dependencies and remove the vendor directory in %prep (might take a while). That implies packaging any missing dependency.

 - It is not ok to apply a patch on some architecture only. The arch detection if needed should be in the patched code itself.

 - with_bundled isn't defined anywhere.


There's a new way to package the Go libraries, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/More_Go_packaging and samples: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/golang/

It would be great to convert to the new style for F27-Rawhide and keep the old style for EPEL7.

> - Use a more meaningful name for your archive: 
>
> Source0:        https://%{provider_prefix}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-% {version}.tar.gz

That results in the source url no longer being valid and doesn't that go against the Fedora url guidelines which wants the actual source url?

> - Add a comment above the patch describing why it is needed.

Will fix

> - You should unbundle the dependencies and remove the vendor directory in %prep (might take a while). That implies packaging any missing dependency.

This was recommended to me by one of the package wranglers as well as the cri-o people until the GO packaging guidelines are finalized

> - It is not ok to apply a patch on some architecture only. The arch detection if needed should be in the patched code itself.

Will fix

> - with_bundled isn't defined anywhere.

Will fix

> There's a new way to package the Go libraries, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/More_Go_packaging and samples: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/golang/
>
> It would be great to convert to the new style for F27-Rawhide and keep the old style for EPEL7.

That looks to be a proposal. Does the draft not have precedence?

(In reply to ralford from comment #3)
> > - Use a more meaningful name for your archive: 
> >
> > Source0:        https://%{provider_prefix}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-% {version}.tar.gz
> 
> That results in the source url no longer being valid and doesn't that go
> against the Fedora url guidelines which wants the actual source url?
> 
The source URL I provided is valid, check again.


> > - Add a comment above the patch describing why it is needed.
> 
> Will fix
> 
> > - You should unbundle the dependencies and remove the vendor directory in %prep (might take a while). That implies packaging any missing dependency.
> 
> This was recommended to me by one of the package wranglers as well as the
> cri-o people until the GO packaging guidelines are finalized
> 
Could take months, packages are already being unbundled.

> > - It is not ok to apply a patch on some architecture only. The arch detection if needed should be in the patched code itself.
> 
> Will fix
> 
> > - with_bundled isn't defined anywhere.
> 
> Will fix
> 
> > There's a new way to package the Go libraries, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/More_Go_packaging and samples: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/golang/
> >
> > It would be great to convert to the new style for F27-Rawhide and keep the old style for EPEL7.
> 
> That looks to be a proposal. Does the draft not have precedence?

Most Go packages have already been converted to the new style this past year.

> The source URL I provided is valid, check again.

Doh! My bad. Typed it in wrong.

> Could take months, packages are already being unbundled.

Okay. Thanks for the review and answering questions. Will work through your comments.

I opened this with the wrong email. Apologies for all involved. Closing as duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615641

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1615641 ***