Bug 2259210

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6921687
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2259210-rust-cached_proc_macro/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06921687-rust-cached_proc_macro/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

> # FIXME: no license files detected

This needs to be addressed in some way.

It looks like the upstream repository actually contains license files, but they are not linked into this subdirectory, so "cargo publish" will not include them. Both the Apache-2.0 and MIT licenses require that redistributed sources contain a copy of the actual license text, so this is a hard requirement for us.

Please report this to the upstream project and ask them to include license texts in all published crates.

Here's an example of a similar report that I filed a while ago:
https://github.com/Devolutions/picky-rs/issues/230

It is usually fixed easily by adding symbolic links:
https://github.com/djc/askama/pull/947

PS: I'm curious, what are you packaging this crate for?

Hi Fabio, thanks for the review. This comes as a dependency for sigstore (https://crates.io/crates/cached/reverse_dependencies), which comes as a dependency for bpfman as well. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257948. I'll get to see if I can fix that upstream, should be pretty straightforward. Thanks!

(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #2)
> > # FIXME: no license files detected
> 
> This needs to be addressed in some way.
> 
> It looks like the upstream repository actually contains license files, but
> they are not linked into this subdirectory, so "cargo publish" will not
> include them. Both the Apache-2.0 and MIT licenses require that
> redistributed sources contain a copy of the actual license text, so this is
> a hard requirement for us.
> 
> Please report this to the upstream project and ask them to include license
> texts in all published crates.
> 
> Here's an example of a similar report that I filed a while ago:
> https://github.com/Devolutions/picky-rs/issues/230
> 
> It is usually fixed easily by adding symbolic links:
> https://github.com/djc/askama/pull/947
> 
Thanks! Opened upstream PR at https://github.com/jaemk/cached/pull/178

Fixed in the new release, I'll put another comment pointing to the new spec and srpm so the build gets kicked.

Spec URL: https://dmellado.fedorapeople.org/rust-cached_proc_macro.spec
SRPM URL: https://dmellado.fedorapeople.org/rust-cached_proc_macro-0.19.1-1.fc39.src
Description: Generic cache implementations and simplified function memoization.
Fedora Account System Username: dmellado

Spec URL: https://dmellado.fedorapeople.org/rust-cached_proc_macro.spec
SRPM URL: https://dmellado.fedorapeople.org/rust-cached_proc_macro-0.19.1-1.fc39.src.rpm
Description: Generic cache implementations and simplified function memoization.
Fedora Account System Username: dmellado

Created attachment 2010200 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6921687 to 6946524

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6946524
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2259210-rust-cached_proc_macro/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06946524-rust-cached_proc_macro/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Looks good to me - thank you!

===

Package was generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review.

- package builds and installs without errors on rawhide
- test suite is run and all unit tests pass (there are no tests)
- latest version of the crate is packaged
- license matches upstream specification and is acceptable for Fedora
- license file is included with %license in %files
- package complies with Rust Packaging Guidelines

Package APPROVED.

===

Recommended post-import rust-sig tasks:

- set up package on release-monitoring.org:
  project: $crate
  homepage: https://crates.io/crates/$crate
  backend: crates.io
  version scheme: semantic
  version filter: alpha;beta;rc;pre
  distro: Fedora
  Package: rust-$crate

- add @rust-sig with "commit" access as package co-maintainer
  (should happen automatically)

- set bugzilla assignee overrides to @rust-sig (optional)

- track package in koschei for all built branches
  (should happen automatically once rust-sig is co-maintainer)

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-cached_proc_macro

FEDORA-2024-39ca9a3152 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-39ca9a3152

FEDORA-2024-39ca9a3152 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.