Spec URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse.spec SRPM URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse-0.7.0-1.fc43.src.rpm Description: Parsing of protobuf source files. Fedora Account System Username: lecris Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=131383686
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8888463 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2358968-rust-protox-parse/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08888463-rust-protox-parse/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.
Spec URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse.spec SRPM URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc43.src.rpm Updated to 0.8.0 Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=131404727
Created attachment 2084439 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8888463 to 8891286
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8891286 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2358968-rust-protox-parse/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08891286-rust-protox-parse/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.
Spec URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse.spec SRPM URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc43.src.rpm Move the patches to `rust2rpm -p` Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=131518720
Created attachment 2084782 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8891286 to 8899938
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8899938 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2358968-rust-protox-parse/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08899938-rust-protox-parse/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.
Some minor issues: > # Broken test because tests.rs is not in crate > sed -i '/#\[cfg(test)\]/,/mod tests/d' src/lex/mod.rs > sed -i '/#\[cfg(test)\]/,/mod tests/d' src/lib.rs > sed -i '/#\[cfg(test)\]/,/mod tests/d' src/parse/mod.rs Would be great if this could be resolved upstream. Including one file shouldn't hurt and would make our lives much easier. (i.e. if tests *compile* you can skip the ones that can't *run*, but if they don't *compile* you need to hack stuff ...) And the README.md file apparently has CRLF line endings, would be good to have that fixed upstream too (for downstream, running "dos2unix --keep-timestamps" or whatever the flag is called should do).
Spec URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse.spec SRPM URL: https://lecris.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-protox-parse/rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc43.src.rpm Fixed the readme's CRLF, and added some comments on the current workarounds. I hope they are only temporary and would be resolved with https://github.com/andrewhickman/protox/pull/95 Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=133095678
Created attachment 2091114 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8899938 to 9072614
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9072614 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2358968-rust-protox-parse/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09072614-rust-protox-parse/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.
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 (some tests patched out because not all test sources are shipped) ✅ latest version of the crate is packaged ✅ license matches upstream specification and is acceptable for Fedora ✅ license files are 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)
Thank you for the review, Fabio
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-protox-parse
FEDORA-2025-aa10c419ee (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-aa10c419ee
FEDORA-2025-aa10c419ee (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-0dec8c5814 (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.el9) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-0dec8c5814
FEDORA-2025-d3be6f8686 (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-d3be6f8686
FEDORA-2025-3d09a118fa (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-3d09a118fa
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-0dec8c5814 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-0dec8c5814 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-d3be6f8686 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-d3be6f8686` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-d3be6f8686 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-3d09a118fa 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-2025-3d09a118fa` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-3d09a118fa See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-0dec8c5814 (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.el9) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-3d09a118fa (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-d3be6f8686 (rust-protox-parse-0.8.0-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.