https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(vimartin@redhat.c |
|om)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Rohan Kanade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(vimartin@redhat.c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Rohan Kanade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(vimartin@redhat.c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #29 from hgue...@redhat.com ---
@Rohan : this will be added in delorean, so every commit in upstream master
branch will be built into packages. So Delorean package of Rally will be what
you want to use.
We do not ship patches in RD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #28 from hgue...@redhat.com ---
(Posting formal review report)
I hereby approve this package since it complies with RDO packaging guidelines,
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Victoria Martinez de la Cruz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(vimartin@redhat.c |
|om)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Rohan Kanade changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rkan...@redhat.com
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
hgue...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #24 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
Added python-oslo-log require. python-oslo-i18n was already in the spec.
Spec URL:
http://vmartinezdelacruz.com/rpms/openstack-rally/openstack-rally.spec
SRPM URL:
http://vmartinezdelacruz
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #23 from hgue...@redhat.com ---
Please add the following requires that are missing: python-oslo-i18n and
python-oslog-log.
I tested with delorean repo, and rally ran fine. we just need to update some
clients in rawhide.
Next step
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Haïkel Guémar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Release|--- |trunk
Component|Package Review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #22 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
Updated the canonical spec/srpm for this review
Spec URL:
http://vmartinezdelacruz.com/rpms/openstack-rally/openstack-rally.spec
SRPM URL:
http://vmartinezdelacruz.com/rpms/openstack-rally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ape...@redhat.com
--- Comment #21 from A
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #20 from Steve Linabery ---
Updated to move the file to /etc/bash_completion.d
Please see updated spec/srpm:
https://slinabery.fedorapeople.org/openstack-rally.spec
https://slinabery.fedorapeople.org/openstack-rally-0.0.4-1.fc20.s
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #19 from Steve Linabery ---
I'm inclined to leave that rally.bash_completion file in
/usr/etc/bash_completion.d
rpmlint complains about it a little when I put it in /etc/bash_completion.d, I
think possibly because it has a setbang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #18 from Steve Linabery ---
(In reply to Haïkel Guémar from comment #17)
> @Jens You're right about it, forgot about this guideline :)
>
> @Steve: yes, I must have been tired when I typed, Before you import the
> package, I reques
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #17 from Haïkel Guémar ---
@Jens You're right about it, forgot about this guideline :)
@Steve: yes, I must have been tired when I typed, Before you import the
package, I request you to do these changes:
* dropping the requirements
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #16 from Steve Linabery ---
I updated my versions of the spec and srpm to help this effort along:
https://slinabery.fedorapeople.org/openstack-rally.spec
https://slinabery.fedorapeople.org/openstack-rally-0.0.4-1.fc20.src.rpm
Haik
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Jens Lody changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fed...@jenslody.de
--- Comment #15 from J
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #14 from Haïkel Guémar ---
Missing Requires:
* bash-completion (you install a file in directory owned by this package)
* python-boto
Missing min versions (known as necessary):
* python-six
* python-requires
* python-oslo-* prefera
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #13 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
Thanks Steve!
I could build the SRPM using your SPEC. Works as expected!
SPEC: https://vkmc.fedorapeople.org/openstack_rally-0.0.4/openstack-rally.spec
SRPM:
https://vkmc.fedorapeople.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #12 from Steve Linabery ---
I see there's no reason to create a separate tarball; the Source0 tarball
already has the PKG-INFO (when you grab it from github from the 0.0.4 tag,
that's missing).
I edited the spec and successfully b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #11 from Steve Linabery ---
(In reply to Steve Linabery from comment #10)
> (In reply to Victoria Martinez de la Cruz from comment #9)
> > Spec URL:
> > https://vkmc.fedorapeople.org/openstack_rally-0.0.1/openstack-rally.spec
> > S
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Steve Linabery changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slina...@redhat.com
--- Comment #10
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Lon Hohberger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1155128
--
You are receiving this ma
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Victoria Martinez de la Cruz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #9 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
Spec URL:
https://vkmc.fedorapeople.org/openstack_rally-0.0.1/openstack-rally.spec
SRPM URL:
https://vkmc.fedorapeople.org/openstack_rally-0.0.1/openstack-rally-0.0.1-1.fc21.src.rpm
Descript
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Bug 1193986 depends on bug 1196366, which changed state.
Bug 1196366 Summary: Review Request: python-designateclient - Client library
for OpenStack Designate DNS API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196366
What|Remove
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Victoria Martinez de la Cruz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(vimartin@redhat.c |
|om)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ape...@gmail.com,
|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Victoria Martinez de la Cruz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1196366
Referenced Bu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #6 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
(In reply to Pranav Kant from comment #5)
> I didn't run mock separately. It was done under fedora-review tool
You are right... apparently there are some missing requirements. Precisely,
py
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #4 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
(In reply to Haïkel Guémar from comment #1)
> I'm taking care of the sponsorship process for Victoria.
>
> @Victoria: when you'll have finished with your informal reviews (at least
> 2), pl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #4 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
(In reply to Haïkel Guémar from comment #1)
> I'm taking care of the sponsorship process for Victoria.
>
> @Victoria: when you'll have finished with your informal reviews (at least
> 2), pl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
--- Comment #3 from Victoria Martinez de la Cruz ---
(In reply to Pranav Kant from comment #2)
> This is an unofficial review only.
>
>
> Package Review
> ==
>
> Legend:
> [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Pranav Kant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pranav...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193986
Haïkel Guémar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
37 matches
Mail list logo
