Bug 1804346

Summary:	Review Request: operator-sdk
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Leonardo Rossetti <lrossett>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	didiksupriadi41, dominik, nphilipp, package-review, pingou
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2021-10-02 00:46:16 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:	1820608
Bug Blocks:	201449

Description Leonardo Rossetti 2020-02-18 18:00:26 UTC

Spec URL: https://fedora-infra.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/operator-sdk-rpm/operator-sdk.spec

SRPM URL: https://fedora-infra.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/operator-sdk-rpm/operator-sdk-0.15.2-1.fc31.src.rpm

Description:
Kubernetes operator sdk framework and tooling that is installed as a rpm package.
It uses/needs the default go build tooling in order to work.

Fedora Account System Username: lrossett

Comment 1 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2020-02-20 07:18:41 UTC

It's a Golang package, so please apply Golang guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Golang/ .

Comment 2 Leonardo Rossetti 2020-02-20 10:30:22 UTC

I have question around go dependencies: not all dependencies of the project are available as a rpm package which makes the spec file unable to resolve it in with the "BuildRequires" directive - should I add those dependencies as rpm packages before?

Otheriwse it will need to use the default go tooling to resolve those dependencies which is not possible if I got it right.

Comment 3 Pierre-YvesChibon 2020-02-20 10:46:53 UTC

> should I add those dependencies as rpm packages before?

And the answer is yes, welcome to the fabulous world of dependencies :)

Comment 4 Package Review 2021-04-04 00:45:21 UTC

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems
that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please
respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the
submitter to proceed with the review.

If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the
fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take
this ticket.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.

Comment 5 Package Review 2021-05-04 00:45:25 UTC

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.

Comment 6 Package Review 2021-10-02 00:46:16 UTC

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.