Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar.spec SRPM URL:http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar-0.1.0-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Tuskar gives administrators the ability to control how and where OpenStack services are deployed across the datacenter. Using Tuskar, administrators divide hardware into "resource classes" that allow predictable elastic scaling as cloud demands grow. This resource orchestration allows Tuskar users to ensure SLAs, improve performance, and maximize utilization across the datacenter. Fedora Account System Username: jomara
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Note: Rpm(s) have files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local: /srv openstack- tuskar-0.1.0-1.fc21.noarch.rpm See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation - Rpmlint errors should be fixed - The tuskar user/group needs some attention. There is a comment about using static UID/GID allocation but the referenced ticket implies that is not required. I think the TODO comment should be removed. Also, I don't think this user/group is actually being used. The systemd unit file runs tuskar-api as root. ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/systemd/system, /usr/lib/systemd [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [!]: Changelog in prescribed format. Missing changelog entry for 0.1.0-1, you can also see this in the rpmlint output. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [!]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). This snippet in %install: --- # install systemd scripts mkdir -p %{buildroot}/usr/lib/systemd/system/ install -p -D -m 644 %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_prefix}/lib/systemd/system/ --- correctly uses %{_prefix} in the second line but has /usr hard-coded in the first. [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [!]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. See "Issues" section at top regarding files in /srv [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. I'm not sure why python-lockfile is a BuildRequires. It doesn't appear to be used anywhere, please double check this one. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: 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. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: No %config files under /usr. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python See note "%{__python} deprecated" at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag Note: Could not download Source0: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/tuskar/tuskar-0.1.0.tar.gz See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. Latest version seems to be 0.2.1: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/tuskar [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. No %check section present. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint openstack-tuskar openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-amqplib openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datacenter -> data center, data-center, centerboard openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: non-standard-group Application/System openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.7-2 ['0.1.0-1.fc21', '0.1.0-1'] openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/cmd/manager.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/cmd/api.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/openstack/common/rootwrap/cmd.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /etc/tuskar tuskar openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/tuskar 0750L openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/common/service.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/openstack/common/config/generator.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /etc/tuskar/tuskar.conf tuskar openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/tuskar/tuskar.conf 0640L openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/openstack/common/rpc/zmq_receiver.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/cmd/dbsync.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-api openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-dbsync openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-manager 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 10 errors, 8 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- openstack-tuskar (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/python PyYAML config(openstack-tuskar) openstack-tripleo-heat-templates python(abi) python-amqplib python-anyjson python-argparse python-eventlet python-flask python-flask-babel python-greenlet python-heatclient python-iso8601 python-keystoneclient python-kombu python-lxml python-migrate python-novaclient python-oslo-config python-pbr python-pecan python-setuptools_git python-six python-sqlalchemy python-webob python-wsme Provides -------- openstack-tuskar: config(openstack-tuskar) openstack-tuskar Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (a430ece) last change: 2014-03-05 Command line :./try-fedora-review -b 1071490 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -L /tmp/review-deps/ Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG Built with local dependencies: /tmp/review-deps/python-tuskarclient-0.1.1-1.fc21.noarch.rpm /tmp/review-deps/openstack-tripleo-heat-templates-0.4.0-1.fc21.noarch.rpm
Thanks eck, fixed up the user (removed tuskar user), moved to a global macro for systemd, and moved the wsgi file to /etc/tuskar. I'm not sure of the best place to make the global source location, as it's not in pypi yet...will ask around about that. Results: srpm: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar-0.1.0-3.fc20.src.rpm spec: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar.spec
This bit still needs addressed: [!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python See note "%{__python} deprecated" at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros The latest upstream appears to be 0.2.2 now: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/tuskar Assuming that's the right upstream source, you should update the Source0 line to point to pypi. Still a lot of rpmlint errors: Checking: openstack-tuskar-0.1.0-3.fc21.noarch.rpm openstack-tuskar-0.1.0-3.fc21.src.rpm openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-amqplib openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: non-standard-group Application/System openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/cmd/manager.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/tuskar/tuskar.wsgi openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/cmd/api.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/openstack/common/rootwrap/cmd.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/tuskar 0750L openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/common/service.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/tuskar/tuskar.conf 0640L openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/openstack/common/rpc/zmq_receiver.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/tuskar/cmd/dbsync.py 0644L /usr/bin/env openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-api openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-dbsync openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-manager openstack-tuskar.src: W: non-standard-group Application/System 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 9 errors, 6 warnings. Lemme know if you have any specific questions on those errors. I won't speak to them all for now.
Sorry, I goofed on my read of rpmlint earlier. This should clear up all of the Es (I did not write man pages for those binaries, and /etc/ is the best place for tuskar wsgi to live for now) SPEC: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar.spec SRPM: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar-0.2.2-1.fc20.src.rpm SOURCE1: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar-api.service SOURCE2: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/tuskar.wsgi Upgraded to 0.2.2 upstream, added tuskar.wsgi as SOURCE2, and fixed perms on all of the files mentioned in the rpmlint you posted.
The rpmlint output looks good now. You are still using the deprecated %{__python} macro. Please use %{__python2} instead.
ok, got it new srpm: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar-0.2.2-2.fc20.src.rpm new spec: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar.spec
The runtime requirements are questionable: python-pbr python-setuptools_git Probably all that's required to handle that is to rm requirements.txt in the spec prep section. /etc/tuskar/tuskar.wsgi contains from tuskar.api import app as application That's probably something that should go in %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/tuskar OSLO_PACKAGE_VERSION is set to 1.2.0. You probably want to set that to: export OSLO_PACKAGE_VERSION=%{version} There is no handling of the service on install/upgrade etc. Copy those sections from an existing project. For example: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/openstack-ceilometer.git/tree/openstack-ceilometer.spec s/python_sitelib/python2_sitelib/
Thanks Padraig, All comments addressed: spec: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar-0.2.2-3.fc20.src.rpm srpm: http://fedorapeople.org/~jomara/openstack-tuskar.spec
Looks good thanks! Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/padraig/1071490-openstack-tuskar/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: 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. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: No %config files under /usr. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: openstack-tuskar-0.2.2-3.fc20.noarch.rpm openstack-tuskar-0.2.2-3.fc20.src.rpm openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-api openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-dbsync openstack-tuskar.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tuskar-manager openstack-tuskar.src:43: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 43, tab: line 1) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Requires -------- openstack-tuskar (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/env /usr/bin/python2 PyYAML config(openstack-tuskar) openstack-tripleo-heat-templates python(abi) python-anyjson python-argparse python-eventlet python-flask python-flask-babel python-greenlet python-heatclient python-iso8601 python-keystoneclient python-kombu python-lxml python-migrate python-novaclient python-oslo-config python-pecan python-six python-sqlalchemy python-webob python-wsme systemd-units Provides -------- openstack-tuskar: config(openstack-tuskar) openstack-tuskar Source checksums ---------------- https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/t/tuskar/tuskar-0.2.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6b6c15bbb03859f57a6a7b6a7e0bea1c3f5fb54e9b7160c8cf718df6e57a90d7 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6b6c15bbb03859f57a6a7b6a7e0bea1c3f5fb54e9b7160c8cf718df6e57a90d7 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1071490 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: openstack-tuskar Short Description: openstack-tuskar gives administrators the ability to control how and where OpenStack services are deployed across the datacenter Owners: jomara Branches: f20 epel7 InitialCC: jomara
No owners specified.
Git done (by process-git-requests).
openstack-tuskar-0.2.3-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openstack-tuskar-0.2.3-1.fc20