Bug 2091177 - Review Request: golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3 - Console progress bar for Golang
Summary: Review Request: golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3 - Console progress bar for Golang
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mikel Olasagasti Uranga
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 2091178
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-05-27 17:56 UTC by Major Hayden 🤠
Modified: 2022-06-09 12:24 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2022-06-09 01:05:16 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
mikel: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Fedora Pagure releng/fedora-scm-requests issue 44713 0 None None None 2022-05-31 13:43:24 UTC

Description Major Hayden 🤠 2022-05-27 17:56:47 UTC
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mhayden/hcloud/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/04455307-golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3/golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3.spec
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mhayden/hcloud/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/04455307-golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3/golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3-3.0.8-1.fc37.src.rpm
Description: Console progress bar for Golang
Fedora Account System Username: mhayden

I'm working to package Hetzner Cloud's golang bindings (hcloud), and this is one of the dependencies. There is already a package for golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-1, but v3 is the only version that exists in GitHub and hcloud depends on the v3 version.

Comment 1 Mikel Olasagasti Uranga 2022-05-29 11:25:37 UTC
Approved!

Just two minor things:

- README_V1.md applies to previous package, I see it as optional
- LICENSE and v3/LICENSE are the same file and creates a warning

On import, don't forget to do the following:

- Add package to release-monitoring.org
- Add package to Koschei
- Give go-sig privileges on package
- Close the review bug by referencing it in the rpm changelog and/or the Bodhi ticket. (rhbz#BUG_ID)

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

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


Issues:
=======
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
  Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/licenses/golang-github-
  cheggaaa-pb-devel/LICENSE
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_duplicate_files


===== 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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
     upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD
     3-Clause License". 48 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /tmp/major/2091177-golang-github-cheggaaa-
     pb-3/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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
[-]: 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 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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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

===== 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in golang-
     github-cheggaaa-pb-devel , compat-golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3-devel
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: %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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[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
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/cheggaaa/pb/archive/v3.0.8/pb-3.0.8.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 17cb166dfe931ccdf3742271442dcfb2b886099d3e32fb706e2c4752133b2910
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 17cb166dfe931ccdf3742271442dcfb2b886099d3e32fb706e2c4752133b2910


Requires
--------
golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    go-filesystem
    golang(github.com/VividCortex/ewma)
    golang(github.com/fatih/color)
    golang(github.com/mattn/go-colorable)
    golang(github.com/mattn/go-isatty)
    golang(github.com/mattn/go-runewidth)
    golang(golang.org/x/sys/unix)

compat-golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    go-filesystem
    golang-ipath(github.com/cheggaaa/pb)



Provides
--------
golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-devel:
    golang(github.com/cheggaaa/pb)
    golang(github.com/cheggaaa/pb/v3)
    golang(github.com/cheggaaa/pb/v3/termutil)
    golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-devel
    golang-ipath(github.com/cheggaaa/pb)

compat-golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3-devel:
    compat-golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3-devel
    golang(github.com/cheggaaa/pb/v3/pb)
    golang(github.com/cheggaaa/pb/v3/pb/v3)
    golang(github.com/cheggaaa/pb/v3/pb/v3/termutil)
    golang-symlink(github.com/cheggaaa/pb/v3/pb)



Generated by fedora-review 0.8.0 (e988316) last change: 2022-04-07
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2091177
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: PHP, C/C++, Python, Java, R, Ocaml, fonts, SugarActivity, Haskell, Perl
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 2 Major Hayden 🤠 2022-05-31 13:43:25 UTC
Thank you, Mikel! 🎉 I'll make those changes on import.

Repo requested: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/44713

Comment 3 Gwyn Ciesla 2022-05-31 15:10:14 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-cheggaaa-pb-3

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2022-05-31 17:29:05 UTC
FEDORA-2022-a24b05cb5e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a24b05cb5e

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2022-05-31 17:31:49 UTC
FEDORA-2022-a24b05cb5e has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2022-05-31 17:36:49 UTC
FEDORA-2022-bec9d70670 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-bec9d70670

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2022-05-31 19:16:40 UTC
FEDORA-2022-eb31b2f25f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eb31b2f25f

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2022-06-01 02:29:47 UTC
FEDORA-2022-bec9d70670 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-bec9d70670 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-bec9d70670

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2022-06-01 02:43:00 UTC
FEDORA-2022-eb31b2f25f has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-eb31b2f25f \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eb31b2f25f

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2022-06-09 01:05:16 UTC
FEDORA-2022-bec9d70670 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2022-06-09 12:24:32 UTC
FEDORA-2022-eb31b2f25f has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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