Description: OpenStack Dashboard plugin for Trove project Spec URL: https://github.com/pdmack/openstack-trove-ui/blob/rpm-master/openstack-trove-ui.spec SRPM URL: https://pmackinn.fedorapeople.org/openstack-trove-ui/openstack-trove-ui-6.0.0.0-0.20160401140625.78e9f78.el7.centos.src.rpm
I could not test in depth, but the package generated from the above RPM works on the RC1 of RDO Mitaka. The pages are displayed and can be browsed, and the buttons triggers actions, but I didn't test if the actions really works with a live datastore.
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pdmack/openstack-trove-ui/rpm-master/openstack-trove-ui.spec SRPM URL: https://pmackinn.fedorapeople.org/openstack-trove-ui/openstack-trove-ui-6.0.0.0-0.20160401140625.78e9f78.el7.centos.src.rpm
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pdmack/openstack-trove-ui/rpm-master/openstack-trove-ui.spec SRPM URL: https://pmackinn.fedorapeople.org/openstack-trove-ui/openstack-trove-ui-6.0.0.0-0.20160405224335.7ff6706.el7.centos.src.rpm
Spec URL: https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/openstack-trove-ui.spec SRPM URL: https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/openstack-trove-ui-6.0.0-0.1.0rc2.el7.src.rpm To fasten the review, I fixed the packaging: * include python bytecode * requires: openstack-dashboard * Sources uses tarballs.openstack.org I also rebuild 6.0.0 RC2 as automated reviewing tool does not support delorean-style spec file.
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)". 14 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/haikel/openstack-trove-ui/review-openstack- trove-ui/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/openstack- dashboard/enabled [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]: 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 %license. [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]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [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]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [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]: 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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: openstack-trove-ui-6.0.0-0.1.0rc2.fc25.noarch.rpm openstack-trove-ui-6.0.0-0.1.0rc2.fc25.src.rpm openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1731_project_database_backups_panel.py openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1731_project_database_backups_panel.pyo openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1730_project_database_backups_panel.pyc openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1731_project_database_backups_panel.pyc openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1730_project_database_backups_panel.pyo openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1740_project_database_clusters_panel.pyc openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1710_database_panel_group.py openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1720_project_databases_panel.py openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1720_project_databases_panel.pyc openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1730_project_database_backups_panel.py openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1740_project_database_clusters_panel.pyo openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1740_project_database_clusters_panel.py openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1710_database_panel_group.pyc openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1710_database_panel_group.pyo openstack-trove-ui.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled/_1720_project_databases_panel.pyo 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 15 warnings. Requires -------- openstack-trove-ui (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): openstack-dashboard python(abi) python-babel python-iso8601 python-keystoneclient python-swiftclient python-troveclient Provides -------- openstack-trove-ui: openstack-trove-ui Source checksums ---------------- http://tarballs.openstack.org/trove-dashboard/trove-dashboard-6.0.0.0rc2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1c2c4fda2b0adff90891b3fbf312ac76ecc688d9dbb00c9f6b68b6a01f724ce0 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1c2c4fda2b0adff90891b3fbf312ac76ecc688d9dbb00c9f6b68b6a01f724ce0 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n /home/haikel/openstack-trove-ui/ -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 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, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
Review approved, I'll do the import today.
http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=10498
The dashboard can be installed and work properly. When the package is removed, few stale files are left under /usr/share/openstack-dashboard/openstack_dashboard/local/enabled/, but they *do not* affect the restart of httpd, unlike openstack-sahara-ui where they prevents the restart, not sure if it's a red herring: _1710_database_panel_group.pyc _1720_project_databases_panel.pyc _1730_project_database_backups_panel.pyc _1731_project_database_backups_panel.pyc _1740_project_database_clusters_panel.pyc
Created attachment 1149929 [details] Fix bytecode files symlinks
The build with the patch in #c9 (6.0.0-2) correctly cleans the files, but I think it should be done the other way, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1323222#c7
Review to reverse symlinks at https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/1127/
This was accepted so this bug can be closed.