Bug 1150504 - Review Request: openstack-ironic-discoverd - hardware properties discovery daemon for OpenStack Ironic
Summary: Review Request: openstack-ironic-discoverd - hardware properties discovery da...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Haïkel Guémar
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-10-08 11:37 UTC by Dmitry Tantsur
Modified: 2017-09-15 18:21 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-09-15 18:21:55 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
karlthered: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Dmitry Tantsur 2014-10-08 11:37:21 UTC
Spec URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1730743/ironic-discoverd/openstack-ironic-discoverd.spec
SRPM URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1730743/ironic-discoverd/openstack-ironic-discoverd-0.1.1-1.fc20.src.rpm
Description: Simple hardware properties discovery daemon for use with OpenStack Ironic. Provides API endpoints for the discovery process and manages iptables rules. Is designed for use within TripleO, currently under review in Instack: https://github.com/agroup/instack-undercloud/pull/41
Fedora Account System Username: divius

I am an upstream developer of ironic-discoverd package. This is my first package, so I need a sponsor. 
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7798841

Comment 1 Dmitry Tantsur 2014-10-08 11:40:20 UTC
rpmlint output:

E: non-readable /etc/ironic-discoverd/discoverd.conf 0640L
configuration file will contain a password, so it should not be readable by anyone.

W: no-manual-page-for-binary ironic-discoverd
not sure about this one, the man page is included, and `man ironic-discoverd` works as expected after installing resulting RPM.

Comment 2 Haïkel Guémar 2014-10-09 09:11:58 UTC
As part of the sponsoring process, I will ask to do two informal reviews:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1148529
+ one taken from this list http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html (preferably non-green ones)

I suggest you look at the fedora-review tool to assist you and Fedora Packaging Guidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines


This is to assess your understanding of packaging and our guidelines, as until you're sponsored, I can't approve yet your package (which should be fast)

When you're done, please link the two reviews here and set the needinfo flag

Comment 3 Dmitry Tantsur 2014-10-09 12:41:58 UTC
First review ready, second to go soon: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1148529#c1

Comment 4 Dmitry Tantsur 2014-10-09 13:38:01 UTC
The second: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1109717#c7

Comment 5 Haïkel Guémar 2014-10-14 08:39:56 UTC
ACK for both reviews, that should be good :)
Since you told me that you're gonna roll up a new release soon, I'll wait the spec/srpm update for the formal review.

Comment 7 Haïkel Guémar 2014-10-14 14:45:43 UTC
* You should remove bundled eggs-info in %prep
* I suggest you use the %license tag to mark license files
(For the record, since packaging guidelines has not been updated, you may read the FPC ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411)
ATM, I suggest that you add the fallback macro (required on EL6)
%{?!_licensedir:%global license %%doc} 
%license LICENSE

Except that, it should be good.

Comment 9 Haïkel Guémar 2014-10-15 07:50:43 UTC
Hi Dmitry, I sponsored you into the packaging group. Feel free to ask me any questions related to packaging or guidelines, that's also part of the sponsoring package :)

---

As this package complies with Fedora packaging guidelines, I hereby approve it.
Please submit a SCM request.

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:
     "Unknown or generated". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/haikel/1150504-openstack-
     ironic-discoverd/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/share/licenses
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/licenses
[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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: 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.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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]: 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.
[x]: 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]: 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
-------
Checking: openstack-ironic-discoverd-0.2.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
          openstack-ironic-discoverd-0.2.0-1.fc22.src.rpm
openstack-ironic-discoverd.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/ironic-discoverd/discoverd.conf 0640L
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint openstack-ironic-discoverd
openstack-ironic-discoverd.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/ironic-discoverd/discoverd.conf 0640L
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
openstack-ironic-discoverd (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /bin/sh
    /usr/bin/python2
    config(openstack-ironic-discoverd)
    python(abi)
    python-eventlet
    python-flask
    python-ironicclient
    python-keystoneclient
    python-requests
    python-six
    systemd



Provides
--------
openstack-ironic-discoverd:
    config(openstack-ironic-discoverd)
    openstack-ironic-discoverd



Source checksums
----------------
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/i/ironic-discoverd/ironic-discoverd-0.2.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : d01cae6490859bb06c1dec9de594e31a7f3e6a9bbe26e63821f59bd64154e6e7
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d01cae6490859bb06c1dec9de594e31a7f3e6a9bbe26e63821f59bd64154e6e7

Comment 10 Dmitry Tantsur 2014-10-15 08:49:50 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: openstack-ironic-discoverd
Short Description: Hardware discovery daemon for OpenStack Ironic
Upstream URL: https://github.com/Divius/ironic-discoverd
Owners: divius
Branches: 
InitialCC:

Comment 11 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-10-15 10:08:51 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 12 Upstream Release Monitoring 2015-10-13 11:08:05 UTC
social's scratch build of openstack-puppet-modules?#db4e135626252ebf0b23b8a0e6e98ce0dcf2f9e6 for git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/openstack-puppet-modules?#db4e135626252ebf0b23b8a0e6e98ce0dcf2f9e6 and rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11426591

Comment 13 Jason Tibbitts 2017-09-15 18:21:55 UTC
Not sure why this is still open; the package was imported and then retired.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.