Bug 2157815

Summary: Review Request: rust-dotenvy - Well-maintained fork of the dotenv crate
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Aleksei Bavshin <alebastr89>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Carmelo Sarta <carmelo.sarta.main>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: carmelo.sarta.main, decathorpe, package-review
Target Milestone: ---Flags: carmelo.sarta.main: 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: 2023-01-16 01:37:51 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: 2157519    

Description Aleksei Bavshin 2023-01-03 03:24:40 UTC
Spec URL: https://alebastr.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-dotenvy/rust-dotenvy.spec
SRPM URL: https://alebastr.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-dotenvy/rust-dotenvy-0.15.6-1.fc37.src.rpm
Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=95732682
Description:
Well-maintained fork of the dotenv crate
Fedora Account System Username: alebastr

Comment 1 Carmelo Sarta 2023-01-06 08:58:40 UTC
Thanks Aleksei for the package!

rust2rpm package, fedora-review is correct:

- The specfile is sane.
- License is correct
- Builds successfully in mock
- No rpmlint errors
- %check section passes
- The latest version is packaged
- The package complies with the Packaging Guidelines.

Package approved! On import, don't forget to do the following:

- Add package to release-monitoring.org
- Add package to Koschei.
- Give rust-sig privileges on package
- Close the review bug by referencing it in the rpm changelog and/or the Bodhi ticket. (rhbz#BUG_ID)

Thanks!

Comment 2 Gwyn Ciesla 2023-01-06 19:21:31 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-dotenvy

Comment 3 Fedora Update System 2023-01-07 04:07:39 UTC
FEDORA-2023-636ca512cf has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-636ca512cf

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2023-01-07 04:51:04 UTC
FEDORA-2023-e4cae97a75 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-e4cae97a75

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2023-01-08 02:39:49 UTC
FEDORA-2023-e4cae97a75 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-e4cae97a75`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-e4cae97a75

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2023-01-08 02:52:21 UTC
FEDORA-2023-636ca512cf has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-636ca512cf`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-636ca512cf

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2023-01-16 01:37:51 UTC
FEDORA-2023-e4cae97a75 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2023-01-16 01:55:01 UTC
FEDORA-2023-636ca512cf has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 9 Fabio Valentini 2023-01-17 15:58:37 UTC
This package should not have been approved as-is, since the MIT license *requires* that redistributed sources contain a copy of the license text - which is not the case here. The license tag for the binary sub-package is also missing entirely.

I'll submit a fixup to address these issues, but please be more thorough with package reviews in the future.