Spec URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-riaknostic.spec SRPM URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-riaknostic-1.1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: A set of tools that diagnoses common problems which could affect a Riak node or cluster. When experiencing any problem with Riak, riaknostic should be the first thing run during troubleshooting. The tool is integrated with Riak via the riak-admin script. Fedora Account System Username: peter This is one of the requirements for Riak 1.3.2+. Koji scratchbuild for Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5687654
Hi Peter, I found some small issues: rpmlint output: erlang-riaknostic.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US riak → false positive erlang-riaknostic.src: W: invalid-url Source0: basho-riaknostic-v1.1.0-0-g8cfb08e.tar.gz → You can use github link like https://github.com/basho/riaknostic/archive/v1.1.0.tar.gz, which should give the same file. Also, there's a new upstream release v1.2.0. erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US riak → false positive erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: E: no-binary erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib → both are normal for Erlang-related packages Is the package really usable without riak-admin? The documentation mentions that it can be run standalone for testing purposes... I don't know almost anything about riak, so I'm guessing here, but I think that it should have Requires:riak. Also, maybe the description could be updated to say "is a plugin for riak-admin" instead of "is integrated with ...", just to be more direct. So, the only two non-suggestion things are Source and the new upstream release. I'll do a point-by-point review when that is fixed.
Should we add VCS tag? I think rpm doesn't support checkout from git and install, not sure if we need that.
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #2) > Should we add VCS tag? I think rpm doesn't support checkout from git and > install, not sure if we need that. I don't think a tag is needed. rpm just uses the provided tarball, and doesn't use the URL in Source directly. github allows to download a tarball from any commit, tagged or not.
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #1) > Hi Peter, > I found some small issues: > > rpmlint output: > > erlang-riaknostic.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US riak → false > positive > erlang-riaknostic.src: W: invalid-url Source0: > basho-riaknostic-v1.1.0-0-g8cfb08e.tar.gz → You can use github link like > https://github.com/basho/riaknostic/archive/v1.1.0.tar.gz, which should give > the same file. > > Also, there's a new upstream release v1.2.0. > > erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US riak → > false positive > > erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: E: no-binary > erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib > → both are normal for Erlang-related packages > > Is the package really usable without riak-admin? The documentation mentions > that it can be run standalone for testing purposes... I don't know almost > anything about riak, so I'm guessing here, but I think that it should have > Requires:riak. > > Also, maybe the description could be updated to say "is a plugin for > riak-admin" instead of "is integrated with ...", just to be more direct. > > So, the only two non-suggestion things are Source and the new upstream > release. I'll do a point-by-point review when that is fixed.
Sorry, submitted too fast. (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #1) > erlang-riaknostic.src: W: invalid-url Source0: > basho-riaknostic-v1.1.0-0-g8cfb08e.tar.gz → You can use github link like > https://github.com/basho/riaknostic/archive/v1.1.0.tar.gz, which should give > the same file. Fixed. > Also, there's a new upstream release v1.2.0. Yes, I'm aware of this. But I can't use 1.2.0 until I upgrade to Riak 1.4.x (I plan to update in Fedora 21). > Is the package really usable without riak-admin? The documentation mentions > that it can be run standalone for testing purposes... I don't know almost > anything about riak, so I'm guessing here, but I think that it should have > Requires:riak. It's not a standalone package - it's a library. README doesn't properly describes that. riak-admin is the script from riak package which could use riaknostic if this library is available. So it's riak who is dependent upon riaknostic, not the opposite. > Also, maybe the description could be updated to say "is a plugin for > riak-admin" instead of "is integrated with ...", just to be more direct. Yes, definitely! New package: * http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-riaknostic.spec * http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-riaknostic-1.1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #2) > Should we add VCS tag? I think rpm doesn't support checkout from git and > install, not sure if we need that. I added this mostly for the reference.
REVIEW: Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable - rpmlint is not completely silent erlang-riaknostic.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: https://github.com/basho/riaknostic/archive/1.1.0/riaknostic-1.1.0.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found ^^^ I think it should be https://github.com/basho/riaknostic/archive/v1.1.0.tar.gz 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US riak -> risk, rial, rink erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: E: no-binary erlang-riaknostic.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. ^^^ false positives + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. Package follows erlang package naming guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (Apache License v. 2). + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. - The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Please use https://github.com/basho/riaknostic/archive/v1.1.0.tar.gz as the Source. + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. Is the explicit version in 'erlang-erts >= R13B' necessary? Isn't R13B ancient? 0 No need to handle locales. 0 The package doesn't store shared library files. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. 0 The package is not designed to be relocatable. + The package MUST own all directories that it creates. + The package doesn't list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. 0 No extremely large documentation files. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. 0 No static libraries. + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. 0 Not a GUI application. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. APPROVED.
Thanks! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: erlang-riaknostic Short Description: A diagnostic tool for Riak installations Owners: peter Branches: f19 el6 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).