[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(ihrachys@redhat.c |fedora-cvs? |om) | --- Comment #2 from Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: openstack-designate Short Description: Openstack DNS service Upstream URL: https://launchpad.net/designate Owners: ihrachyshka Branches: InitialCC: ihrachyshka -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version||openstack-designate-2015.1. ||0-1.fc23 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2015-06-15 12:28:47 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Alan Pevec ape...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |RAWHIDE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Alan Pevec ape...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1230899 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230899 [Bug 1230899] Need designate packages in Kilo -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ihrac...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(ihrachys@redhat.c ||om) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163
Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com ---
Approved, there are improvements which can be added later (SHOULD items):
- add %check section
- no-manual-page-for-binary and no-documentation rpmlint warnings
Package Review
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
designate-2015.1.0/designate/api/v2/controllers/rest.py is BSD (3 clause)
which can be relicensed as ASL 2.0
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
NB fedora-review reports rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
but removals under # Remove unused files are fine!
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
/etc/sudoers.d/designate is not noreplace which came from Neutron,
argumentation in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1039817#c16
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Subpackages do have versioned dep:
python-%{service} = %{version}-%{release}
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1228163] Review Request: openstack-designate - Openstack DNS service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228163 Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ape...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
