Bug 840636
Summary: | Review Request: heat-jeos - create JEOS images for Heat | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jeff Peeler <jpeeler> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Steven Dake <sdake> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | dwmw2, notting, package-review, sdake |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | sdake:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2012-10-07 15:57:07 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: | 956408 |
Description
Jeff Peeler
2012-07-16 18:55:06 UTC
Adding FE-NEEDSPONSOR, although I'm sure Steve will sponsor this package as well. (See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840619) Jeff, need a python2-devel BR the heat_jeos dir appears unowned I'll provide a more complete review in the morning. I added python2-devel. I think the directory is owned since I did: %{python_sitelib}/heat_jeos*, which I thought would cover both the directory and its contents. Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/heat-api/heat-rpms/master/heat_jeos.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpeeler/heat_jeos-1-1.src.rpm with version bump this time. Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/heat-api/heat-rpms/master/heat_jeos.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpeeler/heat_jeos-1-2.src.rpm Removing FE-NEEDSPONSOR - Jeff has been sponsored in a different review. Can you remove heat as a depends for heat_jeos. The idea behind making a separate tool was so that heat didn't need to be installed to generate jeos images. Also, it would make the fedora review easier, since heat is not in mock for fedora-review tool. :) Regards -steve Removed heat from requires. Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/heat-api/heat-rpms/master/heat_jeos.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpeeler/heat_jeos-1-3.src.rpm Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== Generic ==== [x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: EXTRA Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [-]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required [-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [!]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. Please include LICENSE in the %doc section [x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)" For detailed output of licensecheck see file: /home/sdake/heat-jeos/840636-heat_jeos/licensecheck.txt [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Package is not relocatable. [!]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. Does not require yum, in any regard, yum is in the list of expected by default packages. [x]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: MUST Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [!]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [x]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [-]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. Issues: [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions [!]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. Please include LICENSE in the %doc section [!]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. Does not require yum, in any regard, yum is in the list of expected by default packages. Rpmlint ------- Checking: heat_jeos-1-3.noarch.rpm heat_jeos-1-3.src.rpm heat_jeos.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libvirt -> liberty heat_jeos.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libvirt -> liberty 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Requires -------- heat_jeos-1-3.noarch.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/env /usr/bin/python oz python(abi) = 2.7 python-glance python-lxml python-prettytable python-psutil yum Provides -------- heat_jeos-1-3.noarch.rpm: heat_jeos = 1-3 MD5-sum check ------------- https://github.com/downloads/heat-api/heat-jeos/heat_jeos-1.tar.gz : MD5SUM this package : 5467d6ad37054636876948649397c042 MD5SUM upstream package : 5467d6ad37054636876948649397c042 Generated by fedora-review 0.2.0 (53cc903) last change: 2012-07-09 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 840636 External plugins: Jeff, This package has 3 blocking issues: [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions [!]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. Please include LICENSE in the %doc section [!]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. Does not require yum, in any regard, yum is in the list of expected by default packages. Removed 3 blocking issues above. Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/heat-api/heat-rpms/master/heat_jeos.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpeeler/heat_jeos-1-4.src.rpm PASS Must: Python eggs must be built from source. They cannot simply drop an egg from upstream into the proper directory. (See prebuilt binaries Guidelines for details) PASS Must: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. N/A Must: When building a compat package, it must install using easy_install -m so it won't conflict with the main package. N/A Must: When building multiple versions (for a compat package) one of the packages must contain a default version that is usable via "import MODULE" with no prior setup. N/A Should: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. Package passes all review items. PACKAGE APPROVED FOR FEDORA. Jeff, Please submit a SCM request. Nice work. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: heat-jeos Short Description: a tool to create JEOS images for Heat Owners: asalkeld imain jpeeler sdake tsedovic zbitter Branches: devel InitialCC: Package name in summary and in SCM request don't match, and not all FAS accounts listed are members of Pacakger group, please correct and re-set cvs flag. Given Jon's comments, I reread the package naming guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Separators Those indicate that an underscore is not an approved character for a subpackage. Revoking approved status until new SRPM/SPEC is submitted. Renamed heat_jeos to heat-jeos. Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/heat-api/heat-rpms/master/heat-jeos.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpeeler/heat-jeos-1-5.src.rpm PACKAGE APPROVED FOR FEDORA. Please submit a valid SCM request. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: heat-jeos Short Description: a tool to create JEOS images for Heat Owners: asalkeld imain jpeeler sdake zaneb Branches: devel InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: heat-jeos New Branches: el6 Owners: sdake, asalkeld, jpeeler, zaneb InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). |