Bug 2367699

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9067492
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2367699-ansible-role-robertdebock-users/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09067492-ansible-role-robertdebock-users/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.

So, it seems there is no packaging policy for ansible-role, I think this could be a opportunity to add one. the only example I found of reviewed ansible role were in openstack so I will take a look at them.

However, in the mean time, I have a few comments (not looked in detail yet at the fedora-review output):

- there is requirements (https://github.com/robertdebock/ansible-role-users/blob/master/requirements.yml) that seems to be missing, and also in the requirements.txt for python requirements. I think the .txt are not needed for run time for now, the 2 roles (bootstrap and core_dependencies) might not be strictly required. However, the collections ones might be important and I think this should be expressed in Requirements (we have a rpm for ansible-collection-community-general.noarch, not sure that's pulled by existing deps, and I think it could be automated). 

- there is molecule tests, so I think there should be a attempt to run molecule in %check, especially since Fedora use python version that are not tested upstream, this might break.

- if I am not wrong, we need to add explicit dependencies and no longer rely , and so we might need openssh (for ssh-keygen), shadow-utils (for chage), sudo (for visudo, used to validate config) and gawk (for awk). Not sure the exact policy nowadays.

(In reply to Michael S. from comment #2)
>
> So, it seems there is no packaging policy for ansible-role, I think this
> could be a opportunity to add one. the only example I found of reviewed
> ansible role were in openstack so I will take a look at them.

FTR, I have quite a few packages coming.

> - there is requirements

I have added ansible-core, ansible-collection-ansible-posix and ansible-collection-community-general as requirements.

Spec URL: https://eseyman.fedorapeople.org/ansible-role-robertdebock-users/ansible-role-robertdebock-users.spec
SRPM URL: https://eseyman.fedorapeople.org/ansible-role-robertdebock-users/ansible-role-robertdebock-users-6.1.5-2.fc42.src.rpm

> - there is molecule tests, so I think there should be a attempt to run
> molecule in %check, especially since Fedora use python version that are not
> tested upstream, this might break.

While I'm not scared of breakage (upstream does CI against Fedora), running molecule does seem to be a good idea, if possible.

> - if I am not wrong, we need to add explicit dependencies and no longer rely
> , and so we might need openssh (for ssh-keygen), shadow-utils (for chage),
> sudo (for visudo, used to validate config) and gawk (for awk). Not sure the
> exact policy nowadays.

If I'm not mistaken, these are used on the managed node, not the control node.

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

Spec URL: https://eseyman.fedorapeople.org/ansible-role-robertdebock-users/ansible-role-robertdebock-users.spec
SRPM URL: https://eseyman.fedorapeople.org/ansible-role-robertdebock-users/ansible-role-robertdebock-users-6.1.8-1.fc43.src.rpm

Created attachment 2148005 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9067492 to 10695807

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10695807
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2367699-ansible-role-robertdebock-users/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10695807-ansible-role-robertdebock-users/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.