Bug 1532023 - Review Request: ddupdate - A Dynamic DNS Updater
Summary: Review Request: ddupdate - A Dynamic DNS Updater
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Antonio T. (sagitter)
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2018-01-07 13:34 UTC by Alec Leamas
Modified: 2018-03-07 09:55 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-01-28 21:32:30 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
anto.trande: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Alec Leamas 2018-01-07 13:34:46 UTC
Spec URL: https://leamas.fedorapeople.org/ddupdate/1/ddupdate.spec
SRPM URL: https://leamas.fedorapeople.org/ddupdate/1/ddupdate-0.1.0-2.fc26.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: leamas
COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/leamas/ddupdate/

Description: A tool to update dynamic IP addresses typically obtained using 
DHCPwith dynamic DNS services such as changeip.com, duckdns.org or no-ip.com.
It makes it  possible to access a machine with a fixed name like
myhost.duckdns.org even if the ip address changes. ddupdate caches the
address, and only attempts the update if the address actually is changed.

The tool has a plugin structure with plugins for obtaining the actual
address (typically hardware-dependent) and to update it (service depen‐
dent). For supported services, it's a linux-centric, user-friendly and
flexible alternative to the ubiquotious ddclient.

ddupdate is distributed with systemd support to run at regular intervals,
and with NetworkManager templates to run when interfaces goes up or down.

Comment 1 Antonio T. (sagitter) 2018-01-07 19:39:10 UTC
- Please, use %py3_build and py3_build macros in respective sections.

- Use %{_unitdir} always

- "%global debug_package %{nil}" is not needed when package is marked as "noarch"

- Fix these SPEC/SRPM differences:

Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/sagitter/1532023-ddupdate/srpm/ddupdate.spec	2018-01-07 19:59:57.758161778 +0100
+++ /home/sagitter/1532023-ddupdate/srpm-unpacked/ddupdate.spec	2018-01-07 12:19:55.000000000 +0100
@@ -57,5 +57,10 @@
 mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/systemd/system
 mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/systemd/system/* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/systemd/system
-rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/*
+
+rm  -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/*
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/LICENSE.txt
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/README.md
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/CONTRIBUTE.md
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/NEWS
 
 %pre

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 38 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/sagitter/1532023-ddupdate/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: 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 20480 bytes in 3 files.
[ ]: 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 %license.
[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]: 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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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:
[ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
     provide egg info.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
     attached diff).
     See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: ddupdate-0.1.0-2.fc28.noarch.rpm
          ddupdate-0.1.0-2.fc28.src.rpm
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changeip -> changeling, change
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US duckdns -> duckpins
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ip -> pi, up, op
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myhost -> my host, my-host, host
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depen -> deepen, depend, pendent
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centric -> eccentric, centrist, concentric
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ubiquotious -> ubiquitous
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ddclient -> dd client, dd-client, client
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changeip -> changeling, change
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US duckdns -> duckpins
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ip -> pi, up, op
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myhost -> my host, my-host, host
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depen -> deepen, depend, pendent
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centric -> eccentric, centrist, concentric
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ubiquotious -> ubiquitous
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ddclient -> dd client, dd-client, client
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changeip -> changeling, change
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US duckdns -> duckpins
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ip -> pi, up, op
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myhost -> my host, my-host, host
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depen -> deepen, depend, pendent
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centric -> eccentric, centrist, concentric
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ubiquotious -> ubiquitous
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ddclient -> dd client, dd-client, client
ddupdate.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://github.com/leamas/ddupdate <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/sagitter/1532023-ddupdate/srpm/ddupdate.spec	2018-01-07 19:59:57.758161778 +0100
+++ /home/sagitter/1532023-ddupdate/srpm-unpacked/ddupdate.spec	2018-01-07 12:19:55.000000000 +0100
@@ -57,5 +57,10 @@
 mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/systemd/system
 mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/systemd/system/* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/systemd/system
-rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/*
+
+rm  -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/*
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/LICENSE.txt
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/README.md
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/CONTRIBUTE.md
+#rm  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/NEWS
 
 %pre


Requires
--------
ddupdate (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /bin/sh
    /usr/bin/python3
    /usr/sbin/ip
    config(ddupdate)
    python(abi)
    python3-straight-plugin
    shadow-utils
    systemd



Provides
--------
ddupdate:
    config(ddupdate)
    ddupdate
    python3.6dist(ddupdate)
    python3dist(ddupdate)



Source checksums
----------------
http://github.com/leamas/ddupdate/archive/0.1.0/ddupdate-0.1.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : c30f7d7b8da3d0f3dfc50d5e581f22f072d1005c47ab2aa13706dd5a1176a951
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c30f7d7b8da3d0f3dfc50d5e581f22f072d1005c47ab2aa13706dd5a1176a951


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1532023
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Comment 2 Alec Leamas 2018-01-08 23:39:27 UTC
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #1)
> - Please, use %py3_build and py3_build macros in respective sections.
> 
> - Use %{_unitdir} always

Fixed, mostly by not using it whatsoever.

> - "%global debug_package %{nil}" is not needed when package is marked as
> "noarch"

Fixed 

> - Fix these SPEC/SRPM differences:

Fixed

spec https://leamas.fedorapeople.org/ddupdate/3/ddupdate.spec
srpm https://leamas.fedorapeople.org/ddupdate/3/ddupdate-0.1.0-3.fc26.src.rpm

Comment 3 Antonio T. (sagitter) 2018-01-12 20:11:30 UTC
- This package is not correctly named, see common SPEC file
  for Python packages:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd=Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Python_source_package_naming

Source rpm must be 'python-ddupdate'; its sub-package is

>>>
%package -n python%{python3_pkgversion}-%{srcname}
Summary:        %{sum}
%{?python_provide:%python_provide python%{python3_pkgversion}-%{srcname}}

%description -n python%{python3_pkgversion}-%{srcname}
An python module which provides a convenient example.

...

%files -n python%{python3_pkgversion}-%{srcname}
%license COPYING
%doc README.rst
%{python3_sitelib}/*
...
<<<

- Do not use hard-coded directory names:
  rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/*

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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 38 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/sagitter/1532023-ddupdate/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
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[!]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[!]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 3 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 %license.
[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]: 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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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.
[!]: 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).
[ ]: 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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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: ddupdate-0.1.0-3.fc28.noarch.rpm
          ddupdate-0.1.0-3.fc28.src.rpm
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changeip -> changeling, change
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US duckdns -> duckpins
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ip -> pi, up, op
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myhost -> my host, my-host, host
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depen -> deepen, depend, pendent
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centric -> eccentric, centrist, concentric
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ubiquotious -> ubiquitous
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ddclient -> dd client, dd-client, client
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changeip -> changeling, change
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US duckdns -> duckpins
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ip -> pi, up, op
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myhost -> my host, my-host, host
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depen -> deepen, depend, pendent
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centric -> eccentric, centrist, concentric
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ubiquotious -> ubiquitous
ddupdate.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ddclient -> dd client, dd-client, client
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changeip -> changeling, change
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US duckdns -> duckpins
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ip -> pi, up, op
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myhost -> my host, my-host, host
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depen -> deepen, depend, pendent
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centric -> eccentric, centrist, concentric
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ubiquotious -> ubiquitous
ddupdate.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ddclient -> dd client, dd-client, client
ddupdate.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://github.com/leamas/ddupdate <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.



Requires
--------
ddupdate (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /bin/sh
    /usr/bin/python3
    /usr/sbin/ip
    config(ddupdate)
    python(abi)
    python3-straight-plugin
    shadow-utils
    systemd



Provides
--------
ddupdate:
    config(ddupdate)
    ddupdate
    python3.6dist(ddupdate)
    python3dist(ddupdate)



Source checksums
----------------
http://github.com/leamas/ddupdate/archive/0.1.0/ddupdate-0.1.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : c30f7d7b8da3d0f3dfc50d5e581f22f072d1005c47ab2aa13706dd5a1176a951
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c30f7d7b8da3d0f3dfc50d5e581f22f072d1005c47ab2aa13706dd5a1176a951


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1532023
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Comment 4 Alec Leamas 2018-01-14 09:36:04 UTC
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #3)
> - This package is not correctly named, see common SPEC file
>   for Python packages:
>   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file
>  
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd=Packaging:
> NamingGuidelines#Python_source_package_naming

No. These guidelines applies to python modules; that is, python libraries so to speak. It does not apply to a tool like this. There is a large number of examples available - fedora-review, koji and dnf comes to mind (all are python).

> - Do not use hard-coded directory names:
>   rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/*

Fixed. 

Using a new upstream release. New urls:
spec: https://leamas.fedorapeople.org/ddupdate/0.2.0-1/ddupdate.spec
srpm: https://leamas.fedorapeople.org/ddupdate/0.2.0-1/ddupdate-0.2.0-1.fc26.src.rpm

Comment 5 Antonio T. (sagitter) 2018-01-14 11:46:41 UTC
Package approved.

Comment 6 Alec Leamas 2018-01-14 14:19:43 UTC
Thanks for review!

Comment 7 Gwyn Ciesla 2018-01-14 19:41:46 UTC
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ddupdate. You may commit to the branch "f27" in about 10 minutes.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2018-01-15 18:21:00 UTC
ddupdate-0.2.0-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c9b7a8419a

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2018-01-17 06:47:13 UTC
ddupdate-0.2.0-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c9b7a8419a

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2018-01-28 21:32:30 UTC
ddupdate-0.2.0-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 Raphael Groner 2018-02-15 19:13:26 UTC
Thanks for the package.

Can you also build for EPEL7? Scratch build was successful:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25076894

Be aware of our special guidelines for EPEL:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging

Should I open a new bug for this RFE?

Comment 12 Alec Leamas 2018-02-16 10:21:24 UTC
EPEL7 update is in bodhi: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/ddupdate-0.5.2-1.el7

Karma appreciated.

Comment 13 Alec Leamas 2018-03-07 09:55:00 UTC
EPEL process is sort of slow, but at last:

The following comment has been added to the ddupdate-0.6.0-2.el7 update:

bodhi - 2018-03-06 17:31:54.304749 (karma: 0)
This update has been pushed to stable.

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-842be2e212


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