Bug 2358960 - Review Request: rust-postmark - Postmark rust client
Summary: Review Request: rust-postmark - Postmark rust client
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Fabio Valentini
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://crates.io/crates/postmark
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2358962
Blocks: 2357955
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-04-10 21:05 UTC by Cristian Le
Modified: 2025-05-31 02:04 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-05-22 20:04:53 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
decathorpe: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8986526 to 9040407 (900 bytes, patch)
2025-05-14 18:11 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff

Description Cristian Le 2025-04-10 21:05:09 UTC
Spec URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-postmark/rust-postmark.spec
SRPM URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-postmark/rust-postmark-0.10.2-1.fc43.src.rpm

Description:
Postmark rust client.

Fedora Account System Username: lecris

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2025-04-10 21:06:31 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8888321
(failed)

Build log:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2358960-rust-postmark/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08888321-rust-postmark/builder-live.log.gz

Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.

- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network
  unavailability), please ignore it.
- If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they
  are listed in the "Depends On" field


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 2 Fabio Valentini 2025-04-24 10:38:40 UTC
Looks like the heuristics for generating package Summary failed here, can you fix it?

Comment 4 Fabio Valentini 2025-04-28 10:00:58 UTC
Thanks - looks like the package is MIT / Apache-2.0 dual licensed, but only contains the Apache-2.0 license text?

The README is also not helpful:

> postmark is distributed under the terms of both the MIT license and the Apache License (Version 2.0).

This is confusing - is it *both* or *alternatively*? Those are two different things (i.e AND or OR).

Comment 5 Cristian Le 2025-04-28 10:17:28 UTC
Thanks, I've raised the issue with upstream.

Comment 7 Fedora Review Service 2025-05-01 13:20:42 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8986526
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2358960-rust-postmark/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08986526-rust-postmark/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 8 Fabio Valentini 2025-05-02 20:51:19 UTC
Looks good to me, with one exception:

You generated the spec with all features enabled, this might not do what you want:
There are two reqwest backends, and they should be mutually exclusive (native-tls and rustls-tls) - I'm not sure how it doesn't give you a compile error when both are enabled.

It's hard to tell for me without the rust2rpm.toml file *why* you enabled all features - if it's for running / compiling tests, please just enable the features that are necessary. But enabling *both* reqwest-native-tls *and* reqwest-rustls-tls seems to be a mistake.

Comment 9 Cristian Le 2025-05-14 17:58:01 UTC
Spec URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-postmark/rust-postmark.spec
SRPM URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-postmark/rust-postmark-0.11.3-1.fc43.src.rpm

Removed the feature-all. It seems there is no reference of these features in the code, other than reqwest which I've enabled in order to get it to compile. Probably the error would be ocurring on the consumer side

Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=132732012

Comment 10 Fedora Review Service 2025-05-14 18:11:55 UTC
Created attachment 2089843 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8986526 to 9040407

Comment 11 Fedora Review Service 2025-05-14 18:11:58 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9040407
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2358960-rust-postmark/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09040407-rust-postmark/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 12 Fabio Valentini 2025-05-21 21:37:14 UTC
Thanks, looks good to me now!

===

Package was generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review.

✅ package contains only permissible content
✅ package builds and installs without errors on rawhide
✅ test suite is run and all unit tests pass
✅ latest version of the crate is packaged
✅ license matches upstream specification and is acceptable for Fedora
✅ license file is included with %license in %files
✅ package complies with Rust Packaging Guidelines

Package APPROVED.

===

Recommended post-import rust-sig tasks:

- set up package on release-monitoring.org:
  project: $crate
  homepage: https://crates.io/crates/$crate
  backend: crates.io
  version scheme: semantic
  version filter (*NOT* pre-release filter): alpha;beta;rc;pre
  distro: Fedora
  Package: rust-$crate

- set bugzilla assignee overrides to @rust-sig (optional)

Comment 13 Cristian Le 2025-05-22 08:09:08 UTC
Thank you for the review, Fabio

Comment 14 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2025-05-22 08:09:21 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-postmark

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2025-05-22 10:32:21 UTC
FEDORA-2025-c788c2483d (rust-postmark-0.11.3-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-c788c2483d

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2025-05-22 10:32:22 UTC
FEDORA-2025-ceac2606f6 (rust-postmark-0.11.3-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-ceac2606f6

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2025-05-22 20:01:24 UTC
FEDORA-2025-2f8b77ecfd (rust-postmark-0.11.3-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-2f8b77ecfd

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2025-05-22 20:04:53 UTC
FEDORA-2025-2f8b77ecfd (rust-postmark-0.11.3-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2025-05-23 04:48:04 UTC
FEDORA-2025-ceac2606f6 has been pushed to the Fedora 42 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-ceac2606f6`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-ceac2606f6

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

Comment 20 Fedora Update System 2025-05-23 05:23:17 UTC
FEDORA-2025-c788c2483d has been pushed to the Fedora 41 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-c788c2483d`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-c788c2483d

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

Comment 21 Fedora Update System 2025-05-31 01:33:38 UTC
FEDORA-2025-c788c2483d (rust-postmark-0.11.3-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 22 Fedora Update System 2025-05-31 02:04:35 UTC
FEDORA-2025-ceac2606f6 (rust-postmark-0.11.3-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 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.