Bug 1220491

Updated to latest upstream
fixed tests

Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/elastic-curator.spec
SRPM URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/elastic-curator-3.1.0-2.fc22.src.rpm

%description is cute, but not very informative. Please write what it actually does.

mkdir is not necessary if you use install -D. Just add the name again at the end.

- Update to 3.2.0
- Rewrite description
- Remove mkdir in %%install
- Add missing BuildRequires


Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/elastic-curator.spec
SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~piotrp/elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc22.src.rpm

python3-nose-xcover is needed for running the tests while building for Python 3. I've requested python3 module/commit acl in bug 1238822

===== 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: "Unknown or generated". 46 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /var/tmp/1220491-elastic-
     curator/licensecheck.txt
[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.
See #c0.

[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 40960 bytes in 4 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]: 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

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

Rpmlint
-------
Checking: elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc23.noarch.rpm
          elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc23.src.rpm
elastic-curator.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary es_repo_mgr
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
elastic-curator.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary es_repo_mgr
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

Requires
--------
elastic-curator (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    python(abi)
    python3-click
    python3-elasticsearch

Provides
--------
elastic-curator:
    elastic-curator

Everything looks good. Package is APPROVED.

Thank you.


New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: elastic-curator
Short Description: Tools for managing Elasticsearch indices
Upstream URL: https://github.com/elastic/curator
Owners: piotrp
Branches: f21 f22 el6 epel7

Git done (by process-git-requests).

elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc21

elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc22

elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository.

elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.

elastic-curator-3.2.0-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.

elastic-curator-3.2.3-1.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/elastic-curator-3.2.3-1.el7

elastic-curator-3.2.3-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.