Bug 2275318

Here're a few coments:

This package blocks 2275317 as well since it is a dependency of it. 

It seems that table.txt is not documentation but a file needed to rebuild table.go. It should not be marked as documentation IMHO, what do you think?

> ## Add new characters
>
> 1. Edit `table.txt` file.
> 2. Rebuild `table.go` file:
> 
>    ```go
>    go run ./make_table.go
>    ```

The license of the package seems to be the Apache License. IIUC, the appache indicates that a header be applied to every file as a comment:

   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.

      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "{}"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
      identification within third-party archives.

   Copyright {yyyy} {name of copyright owner}

   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
   You may obtain a copy of the License at

... but none of the files do so. I don't know if this is OK but one should try and contact upstream and let them know about this, if you ask me. What do you think?

A hidden file has been included: /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/gosimple/unidecode/.goipath

Spec URL: https://mikel.olasagasti.info/tmp/fedora/golang-github-gosimple-unidecode.spec
SRPM URL: https://mikel.olasagasti.info/tmp/fedora/golang-github-gosimple-unidecode-1.0.1-1.fc41.src.rpm

> This package blocks 2275317 as well since it is a dependency of it. 

done.

> It seems that table.txt is not documentation but a file needed to rebuild table.go. It should not be marked as documentation IMHO, what do you think?

The idea of this package is a library to be used by other libraries or binaries, so if new chars should be added it would be needed to be done upstream. Nobody should use these libraries shipped by Fedora to develop, so it's just a upstream thing.

> I don't know if this is OK but one should try and contact upstream and let them know about this, if you ask me. What do you think?

I'm afraid it's quite common in many Go projects to define the License at "root level" and not add copyright headers to code files. I'll try to contact upstream about it.

> A hidden file has been included: /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/gosimple/unidecode/.goipath

Happens with all Go packages.

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8239785
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2275318-golang-github-gosimple-unidecode/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08239785-golang-github-gosimple-unidecode/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.

It seems good to me. Well done. :)

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-gosimple-unidecode

FEDORA-2024-1cfd7e2686 (golang-github-gosimple-unidecode-1.0.1-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-1cfd7e2686

FEDORA-2024-1cfd7e2686 (golang-github-gosimple-unidecode-1.0.1-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.