[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Mattia Verga changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2021-07-04 15:18:35 --- Comment #22 from Mattia Verga --- Package is in repos -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Bug 1246199 depends on bug 1246192, which changed state. Bug 1246192 Summary: Review Request: python-pymod2pkg - python module to package map https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246192 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 mpr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpr...@redhat.com --- Comment #21 from mpr...@redhat.com --- Please disregard the above comment. That was testing in stage. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #20 from mpr...@redhat.com --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.stg.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rdopkg. You may modify the branch "f26" in about 10 minutes. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #19 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rdopkg -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Haïkel Guémar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|needinfo?(hgue...@redhat.co |fedora-review+ |m) | --- Comment #18 from Haïkel Guémar --- 1. Please fix the source mismatch, but since you're upstream maintainer, I trust you for using published tarballs. Anyway, it does build with the other one 2. I'd move generic build time dependencies git and asciidoc outside of the python2 subpackage 3. Minor item, rdopkg main package does not need to include license file since it pulls it from python{2,3}-rdopkg. Other, I hereby approve this package into Fedora Packages Collection, just make sure to fix the items pointed above. Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: === - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/hguemar/1246199-rdopkg/diff.txt See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL = 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache", "*No copyright* Apache", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 156 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/hguemar/1246199-rdopkg/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. [-]: 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. Note: Documentation size is 266240 bytes in 10 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 must own all directories that it creates. [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]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [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]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [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 s
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Haïkel Guémar changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|hgue...@redhat.com |karlthe...@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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hgue...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(hgue...@redhat.co ||m) --- Comment #17 from Neal Gompa --- @Haikel, do you still want to review this package? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Neal Gompa 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #16 from Neal Gompa --- Looks good to me at this point. That said, Haikel needs actually do the approval. :) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Ruzicka --- W: file-size-mismatch rdopkg-0.45.0.tar.gz is a one time issue due to .spec being included in tarball and I regenerated that without updating PyPI version. Once reviewd, .spec will move to fedora distgit so this will no longer be an issue. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Ruzicka --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/softwarefactory-project/rdopkg/master/rdopkg.spec SRPM URL: https://jruzicka.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/rdopkg-0.45.0-3.fc25.src.rpm Note this package built successfully in my copr on f2{5,6,7}, el7 and rawhide: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jruzicka/rdopkg/build/597985/ -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Ruzicka --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #12) > > I wanted to wait until it's supported in latest EL to avoid %if but OK, > > I'll pave the way ;) > > I'm not sure how it could get supported in EL7, since RPM 4.11 and Yum don't > support it. We'd be waiting for EL8... > > Just do "%if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} >= 8" I've addressed your suggestions in https://softwarefactory-project.io/r/#/c/9546/ Please either leave +1/-1 there (you can login with github) or let me know here if it's OK. > If there's a missing dependency, I'd rather block rdopkg from being included > period. Although missing python3-bunch is being investigated, it is absolutely no reason to block because rdopkg has on-demand import and the missing dep is only needed for `rdopkg cbsbuild` command which is CLI and CLI depends on python2 version so it's all good. I specifically built rdopkg in a way so that one broken subcommand doesn't block entire project and missing deps only surface for commands that really use them. Unlike usual python LOAD ALL THE MODULES and then really use 2 of them ;) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #12 from Neal Gompa --- > I wanted to wait until it's supported in latest EL to avoid %if but OK, I'll > pave the way ;) I'm not sure how it could get supported in EL7, since RPM 4.11 and Yum don't support it. We'd be waiting for EL8... Just do "%if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} >= 8" -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Ruzicka --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #10) > > The Python 3 support is rather fresh and not well tested. Furthermore, > > python3-bunch isn't available. I'll switch python3-rdopkg to provide rdopkg > > as soon as I'm confident in py3 support (in rdopkg and in EL). > > If there's a missing dependency, I'd rather block rdopkg from being included > period. In addition, your current scheme does not allow for a seamless > transition from Python 2 to Python 3 for rdopkg because in order to switch > it, you'd have to obsolete the python2 version, which may not necessarily > work. I would suggest splitting out /usr/bin/rdopkg into an rdopkg > subpackage that Requires the python2 or python3 version depending on what > you prefer. Good suggestion, will do. > For the "optional but recommended" thing, please use Recommends for Fedora. > If it's not a hard dependency, don't make it one. I wanted to wait until it's supported in latest EL to avoid %if but OK, I'll pave the way ;) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #10 from Neal Gompa --- > The Python 3 support is rather fresh and not well tested. Furthermore, > python3-bunch isn't available. I'll switch python3-rdopkg to provide rdopkg > as soon as I'm confident in py3 support (in rdopkg and in EL). If there's a missing dependency, I'd rather block rdopkg from being included period. In addition, your current scheme does not allow for a seamless transition from Python 2 to Python 3 for rdopkg because in order to switch it, you'd have to obsolete the python2 version, which may not necessarily work. I would suggest splitting out /usr/bin/rdopkg into an rdopkg subpackage that Requires the python2 or python3 version depending on what you prefer. For the "optional but recommended" thing, please use Recommends for Fedora. If it's not a hard dependency, don't make it one. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Ruzicka --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #8) > Why does the Python 2 version "Provides: rdopkg = %{version}-%{release}"? Because previously, the package was called just `rdopkg`, this is backward compat. > Why can't the Python 3 version do that in Fedora and EL7? The Python 3 support is rather fresh and not well tested. Furthermore, python3-bunch isn't available. I'll switch python3-rdopkg to provide rdopkg as soon as I'm confident in py3 support (in rdopkg and in EL). -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa --- Why does the Python 2 version "Provides: rdopkg = %{version}-%{release}"? Why can't the Python 3 version do that in Fedora and EL7? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Ruzicka --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/softwarefactory-project/rdopkg/master/rdopkg.spec SRPM URL: https://jruzicka.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/rdopkg-0.45.0-1.fc25.src.rpm -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Ruzicka --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/softwarefactory-project/rdopkg/master/rdopkg.spec SRPM URL: https://jruzicka.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/rdopkg-0.45-0.fc25.src.rpm Description: rdopkg is a tool for automating RPM packaging tasks such as managing patches, updating to a new version and much more. Fedora Account System Username: jruzicka Now with python3 package, tox and pbr support :) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Bug 1246199 depends on bug 1264164, which changed state. Bug 1264164 Summary: Review Request: python-rdoupdate - Manipulation and validation of YAML update files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264164 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |EOL -- 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Ruzicka --- I decided to split rdopkg into a framework and a tool, which will be quite a big change so I'll probably wait with the Fedora inclusion until the split is successful. -- 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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Jakub Ruzicka changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1264164 Flags|needinfo?(jruzicka@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #4 from Jakub Ruzicka --- I'll submit new spec/srpm once both python-pymod2pkg and python-rdoupdate are available in Fedora. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264164 [Bug 1264164] Review Request: python-rdoupdate - Manipulation and validation of YAML update files -- 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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Haïkel Guémar changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jruzi...@redhat.com, ||karlthe...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? ||needinfo?(jruzicka@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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #3 from hgue...@redhat.com --- @Jakub: could you update the src,rpm too? * drop the Group tag, unused now * please switch to python versioned macros * we need to review the python-rdoupdate package (same fixes should be applied to the existing package) -- 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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Jakub Ruzicka changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1246192 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246192 [Bug 1246192] Review Request: python-pymod2pkg - python module to package map -- 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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Ruzicka --- rdopkg uses colors extensivly and many outputs are significantly less readable without them so I'd leave it as hard dependency. I'll remove the comment :) I plan to make rdopkg more modular in the future so let's just deal with the hard deps for now and I'll consider using weak dependencies in the future as I'm very curious about them :) -- 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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||i...@cicku.me --- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng --- What about using weak dependency for python-blessings? -- 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 1246199] Review Request: rdopkg - RPM packaging automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246199 Jakub Ruzicka changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hgue...@redhat.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