Bug 2153766 - Review Request: rust-cursive0.16 - TUI (Text User Interface) library focused on ease-of-use
Summary: Review Request: rust-cursive0.16 - TUI (Text User Interface) library focused ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2153797
Blocks: 2039060
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-12-15 11:57 UTC by Michel Lind
Modified: 2023-02-03 14:00 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: rust-cursive0.16-0.16.3-3.fc36
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-02-03 14:00:24 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Michel Lind 2022-12-15 11:57:16 UTC
Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/rust-cursive0.16.spec
SRPM URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/rust-cursive0.16-0.16.3-1.fc37.src.rpm

Description:
TUI (Text User Interface) library focused on ease-of-use.

Fedora Account System Username: salimma

Comment 1 Michel Lind 2022-12-15 11:58:10 UTC
Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=95395643

This is needed to update rust-cursive which is needed to update below-common, since rust-resctl-demo still requires the older version

Comment 2 Davide Cavalca 2022-12-15 12:01:07 UTC
This is missing license files

Comment 3 Michel Lind 2022-12-15 13:27:39 UTC
Updated: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=95398337

Same spec and SRPM

Comment 4 Fabio Valentini 2022-12-15 14:07:34 UTC
Package review isn't strictly necessary for compat packages, but looks good to me.
I assume you used "rust2rpm cursive 0.16.3 --suffix 0.16" to create the spec?

The only suggestion I have is to use 
%license %{crate_instdir}/LICENSE
instead of plain
%license LICENSE
so that the file is not included twice in the built packages.

Do you want me to formally review and approve the package?

Comment 5 Michel Lind 2022-12-15 14:16:09 UTC
I did, thanks. And good point, reviews are not necessary, though seems this caught a couple of things so it works out! I think Davide is doing the formal review

Comment 6 Michel Lind 2022-12-15 14:31:46 UTC
Repo requested: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/49880


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