[Bug 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-10-18 11:55:05 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-26445cfcfe -- 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 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 Jan Chaloupka changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jan Chaloupka --- Approved -- 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 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460
Dusty Mabe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(dustymabe@redhat. |
|com)|
--- Comment #7 from Dusty Mabe ---
(In reply to Jan Chaloupka from comment #5)
> > $ rpmlint kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.src.rpm
> > kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.x86_64.rpm
> > kompose-debuginfo-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.x86_64.rpm
> > kompose.src:596: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
> > kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
> > /usr/share/doc/kompose/CONTRIBUTING.md
> > kompose.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
> > /usr/share/licenses/kompose/LICENSE
> > kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
> > /usr/share/doc/kompose/RELEASE.md
> > kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/kompose/README.md
> > kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
> > /usr/share/doc/kompose/code-of-conduct.md
> > kompose.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kompose
> > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.
>
> Permissions of the affected files need to be altered.
I sent a patch upstream for the executable files yesterday, but I can't change
what was released in 0.1.0. I guess I'll add code to the rpm to make them not
executable as well.
> Man page is optional.
no work to be done here :)
> The macro should be removed are changed to %%{buildroot}
I changed to comment to not have '%{buildroot}'
latest versions at:
Spec URL: https://dustymabe.fedorapeople.org/kompose-rpm/kompose.spec
SRPM URL:
https://dustymabe.fedorapeople.org/kompose-rpm/kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.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 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 Jan Chaloupka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dustym...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(dustymabe@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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 --- Comment #6 from Jan Chaloupka --- Up to the file permissions and the macro the spec file complies to packaging guidelines. Once updated the spec file can be approved. -- 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 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 Jan Chaloupka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460
--- Comment #5 from Jan Chaloupka ---
> $ rpmlint kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.src.rpm
> kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.x86_64.rpm
> kompose-debuginfo-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.x86_64.rpm
> kompose.src:596: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
> kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
> /usr/share/doc/kompose/CONTRIBUTING.md
> kompose.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/licenses/kompose/LICENSE
> kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/kompose/RELEASE.md
> kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/kompose/README.md
> kompose.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
> /usr/share/doc/kompose/code-of-conduct.md
> kompose.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kompose
> 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.
Permissions of the affected files need to be altered.
Man page is optional.
The macro should be removed are changed to %%{buildroot}
> = MUST items =
>
> C/C++:
> [ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
True
> [ ]: Package contains no static executables.
Go binary is static binary, known fact
> Generic:
> [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
> other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
> Guidelines.
ASL 2.0
> [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
> Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
> found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)",
> "*No copyright* MPL (v2.0)", "ISC", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2
> clause)", "BSD (3 clause) MIT/X11 (BSD like)". 1590 files have unknown
> license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/tmpOV_NQ5/review-
> kompose/licensecheck.txt
non ASL 2.0 licenses are licences of dependencies in the vendor directory, not
the project itself
> [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
True
> [ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
True, Go specific
> [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
It contains bundled libraries, all of them are listed as "Provides:
bundles(library) = %{version}-COMMIT"
> [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
True
> [ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
True
> [ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
No GUI application
> [ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
No devel subpackage, only sources
> [ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
True
> [ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
> names).
That is true
> [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
It is
> [ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
It does not
> [ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
It does
> [ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
No applicable
> [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
True
> [ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
The spec file is readable
> [ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
No systemd
> [ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
Present
> [ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
Not applicable
> [ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
> (~1MB) or number of files.
> Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 5 files.
Not applicable
> [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
It does
> = 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.
Not applicable
> [ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
True
> [ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in kompose-
> debuginfo
True, debuginfo is generated automatically by rpmbuild
> [ ]: Package functions as described.
Not applicable
> [ ]: Latest version is packaged.
True
> [ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
True
> [ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
> translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
Not applicable
> [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
True
> [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
> files.
Not applicable, devel is not generated
> [ ]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
> Note: %define requiring justification: %define gobuild(o:) go build
> -ldflags "${LDFLAGS:-} -B 0x$(head -c20 /dev/urandom|od -An -tx1|tr -d
> ' \\n')" -a -v -x %{?**};
I prefer using %define for functions and %global for constants (constant
variables).
Meaning, the
[Bug 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 --- Comment #3 from Dusty Mabe --- ok rpm has been updated: Spec URL: https://dustymabe.fedorapeople.org/kompose-rpm/kompose.spec SRPM URL: https://dustymabe.fedorapeople.org/kompose-rpm/kompose-0.1.0-0.1.git8227684.fc24.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 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 --- Comment #2 from Jan Chaloupka --- It is sad but in this case I recommend to set with_devel and with_unit_test to 0. As long as the missing dependencies are not packaged in Fedora, it does not make much sense to provide devel or any subpackage that depends on devel. -- 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 1379460] Review Request: kompose - Tool to move from `docker-compose` to Kubernetes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379460 Dusty Mabe changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jchal...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Dusty Mabe --- Hey jchaloup. I ran redora review tool on this rpm myself. One problem I notice is that the devel rpm won't install because the "requires" aren't all met. This makes sense because we don't bundle things in the vendor directory. What do I do about that? -- 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
