[Bug 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
protozero-1.2.2-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
protozero-1.2.2-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
protozero-1.2.2-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update protozero'
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-49d0bbd331

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
protozero-1.2.2-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update protozero'
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-582a04ec39

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/protozero

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
protozero-1.2.2-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-582a04ec39

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
protozero-1.2.2-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-582a04ec39

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Mohamed El Morabity  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #9 from Mohamed El Morabity  ---
The package looks very good and complies with the guidelines (especially
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Header_Only_Libraries).
It looks like dependency graphs do not appear in the Doxygen generated
documentation; the build logs mention the dot command is missing to generate
them. As a result, you should add graphviz to the BuildRequires.

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #10 from Tom Hughes  ---
Something else seems to be dragging in graphviz for me, but an explicit require
is definitely a good idea, so I've added it:

Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero.spec
SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero-1.2.2-2.fc23.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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Mohamed El Morabity  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pikachu.2...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pikachu.2...@gmail.com
  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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Mohamed El Morabity  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #11 from Mohamed El Morabity  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[x]: 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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]: 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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

= EXTRA items =

Generic:
[?]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
 is arched.
 Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 

[Bug 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Tom Hughes  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
   Assignee|i...@cicku.me  |nob...@fedoraproject.org
  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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #8 from Tom Hughes  ---
Update to new upstream version. The dependencies are all in rawhide now, so if
you could take another look at this that would be much appreciated:

Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero.spec
SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero-1.2.2-1.fc23.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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375
Bug 1260375 depends on bug 1264485, which changed state.

Bug 1264485 Summary: Review Request: catch - A modern, C++-native, header-only, 
framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264485

   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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #7 from Tom Hughes  ---
Update to new upstream version:

Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero.spec
SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero-1.2.0-1.fc22.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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Tom Hughes  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1264485



--- Comment #6 from Tom Hughes  ---
New version that unbundles catch.hpp (needs new dependency first) and clears
DEBUG_FLAGS to avoid compiler warnings:

Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero.spec
SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero-1.1.0-3.fc22.src.rpm


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264485
[Bug 1264485] Review Request: catch - A modern, C++-native, header-only,
framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD
-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Marcin Juszkiewicz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mjusz...@redhat.com



--- Comment #4 from Marcin Juszkiewicz  ---

There are two license files in archive. One is Apache License 2.0, other is
BSD. test/include/catch.hpp is under Boost License 1.0 so licensing information
needs to be checked - from quick look no other ones are used.

g++ -c -I. -Iinclude -Itest/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
-Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
-fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -grecord-gcc-switches
-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1  -fvisibility-inlines-hidden
-std=c++11 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -Wsign-compare -Wsign-conversion
-Wunused-parameter -Wno-float-equal -O0 -g -fno-inline-functions
test/t/repeated_packed_fixed32/writer_test_cases.cpp -o
test/t/repeated_packed_fixed32/writer_test_cases.o
In file included from
/usr/include/c++/5.2.1/aarch64-redhat-linux/bits/os_defines.h:39:0,
 from
/usr/include/c++/5.2.1/aarch64-redhat-linux/bits/c++config.h:482,
 from /usr/include/c++/5.2.1/iosfwd:38,
 from /usr/include/c++/5.2.1/ios:38,
 from /usr/include/c++/5.2.1/istream:38,
 from /usr/include/c++/5.2.1/sstream:38,
 from test/include/catch.hpp:72,
 from test/include/test.hpp:2,
 from
test/t/repeated_packed_fixed32/writer_test_cases.cpp:2:
/usr/include/features.h:328:4: warning: #warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires
compiling with optimization (-O) [-Wcpp]
 #  warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires compiling with optimization (-O)
^

This warning is due to -O0 from DEBUG_FLAGS in Makefile. Simply adding
empty one in %check gets rid of it:

%check
%make_build test CFLAGS="%{optflags}" CXXFLAGS="%{optflags}" DEBUG_FLAGS=

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #5 from Tom Hughes  ---
Urgh. That header of course has come from https://github.com/philsquared/Catch
so I probably need to open a review for that to unbundle it which will also
resolve any licensing concerns.

I was aware of the other warning, but wasn't too worried as it's only test code
that we aren't shipping, but if it's that easy to fix then of course I will.

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #3 from Tom Hughes  ---
Anything more I can do here to help move this along?

Happy to do one or two of yours in return, but your web server doesn't seem to
be working so I can't download any 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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375

Christopher Meng  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||i...@cicku.me
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|i...@cicku.me
  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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng  ---
1. SERIOUS: ExcludeArch. It doesn't support big endian! Don't forget MIPS,
since MIPS is going to be added as a secondary arch.

https://github.com/mapbox/protozero/blob/master/include/protozero/byteswap.hpp

2. make test in %check? Be aware of CXXFLAGS and LDFLAGS.

3. Put %description of main under -devel's %description again please? Since
only -devel is produced after rpmbuild, the description is "This package
contains libraries and header files for
developing applications that use %{name}." however doesn't sound
useful/helpful!

4. %define debug_package %{nil}

Use %global.

-- 
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 1260375] Review Request: protozero - Minimalistic protocol buffer decoder and encoder in C++

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260375



--- Comment #2 from Tom Hughes  ---
There's no endianess issue as that file is only use on big endian machines. On
little endian machines the layer above (see pbf_reader.hpp for example) just
does a memcpy instead. I've tested it with a scratch build on PPC here:

http://ppc.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2738907

New version that addresses the other issues:

Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero.spec
SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/tmp/protozero-1.1.0-2.fc22.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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review