Bug 2120464
| Summary: | Review Request: golang-howett-plist - A pure Go property list transcoder | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Anthony Rabbito <hello> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mikel Olasagasti Uranga <mikel> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | hello, mikel, package-review |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | mikel:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2022-10-03 16:39:23 UTC | Type: | --- |
| 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: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 2130734 | ||
|
Description
Anthony Rabbito
2022-08-23 02:34:32 UTC
> %gometa As suggested on IRC, change to %gometa -f > # Upstream license specification: BSD-3-Clause > License: BSD Use SPDX tags. Based on https://github.com/DHowett/go-plist/blob/main/LICENSE I think BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause apply. > %build > for cmd in cmd/* ; do > %gobuild -o %{gobuilddir}/bin/$(basename $cmd) %{goipath}/$cmd > done Is the `ply` command needed? I'm not requesting to remove it, but just want to make sure you want to enable this. Hi Mikel > As suggested on IRC, change to %gometa -f I have done this. > Use SPDX tags. I have updated the licenses to use BSD-2-Clause and BSD-3-Clause with SPDX tags > Is the `ply` command needed? I'm not requesting to remove it, but just want to make sure you want to enable this. It doesn't seem necessary to me so I have removed it and added a note to open a RHBZ if someone needs it. Updated SRPM: https://anthr76.fedorapeople.org/golang-howett-plist/golang-howett-plist-1.0.0-1.fc37.src.rpm Updated spec: https://anthr76.fedorapeople.org/golang-howett-plist/golang-howett-plist.spec > # Upstream license specification: BSD-3-Clause You can remove this old comment generated by previous go2rpm releases > %files > %license LICENSE > %doc README.md You can remove this section, the 3 lines. As no binary is built & installed, %gopkgfiles will take care of the files. I am not going to go through the whole fedora-review template, as this package uses go2rpm. - [x] The specfile is sane. - [x] License is correct - [x] Builds successfully in mock - [x] Package is installable (checked by fedora-review) - [x] No relevant rpmlint errors - [x] %check section passes - [x] The latest version is packaged - [x] `%goipath` is set correctly - [-] Binaries don't conflict with binaries already in the distribution - [x] The package complies with the Packaging Guidelines. Package approved! On import, don't forget to do the following: - [ ] Add package to release-monitoring.org - [ ] Give go-sig privileges on package - [ ] Close the review bug by referencing it in the rpm changelog and the Bodhi ticket. Thanks! Here's the tracking SCM request. https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/47874 (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-howett-plist FEDORA-2022-b1d6f2c103 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-b1d6f2c103 FEDORA-2022-b1d6f2c103 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. FEDORA-2022-899b1a9ffb has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-899b1a9ffb FEDORA-2022-c4afed4c2f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-c4afed4c2f FEDORA-2022-c4afed4c2f has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-c4afed4c2f \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-c4afed4c2f See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. FEDORA-2022-899b1a9ffb has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-899b1a9ffb \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-899b1a9ffb See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. FEDORA-2022-899b1a9ffb has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. FEDORA-2022-c4afed4c2f has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. FEDORA-2023-565edda98c has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-565edda98c FEDORA-2023-565edda98c has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. |