[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-09-01 20:25:47 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/katello-agent-1.1.2-1.el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc16 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/katello-agent-1.1.2-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 Miroslav Suchý changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Miroslav Suchý --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: katello-agent Short Description: The Katello Agent Owners: msuchy Branches: F-18, F-17, F-16, EL-6 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 Lukas Zapletal changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|l...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643
Lukas Zapletal changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||l...@redhat.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Lukas Zapletal ---
Review checklist, last updated 2012-02-07
Based on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
Key: [X] passed, [F] failed, [-] irrelevant
[x] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[x] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[x] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[x] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
[x] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[x] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[x] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If
no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source
URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
[x] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[-] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not
compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a
comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[x] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[-] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[-] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[x] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[x] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[x] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which
does create that directory.
[x] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)
[x] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
[F] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[x] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[-] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
[-] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program
must run properly if it is not present.
[-] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[-] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package.
[-] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
[-] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
[-] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in
the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does
not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your
explanation.
[x] MUST: Packages must not own
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchý --- Yes, I agree. But gofer maintainers hesitate. I tried, but I gave up. Now I just follow what gofer expect. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 Michael Scherer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org --- Comment #2 from Michael Scherer --- What they could do is to have more than 1 directory to load plugins, that would break nothing, allow to respect FHS, permit to place plugin in /usr/local later f needed ( another part of the FHS ), and should be rather straightfoward to implement ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845643] Review Request: katello-agent - The Katello Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845643 --- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchý --- Additional note: I have there buildroot and %clean as I want to target epel5 as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
