https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

Jan Chaloupka jchaloup@redhat.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1212318

Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212318 [Bug 1212318] Review Request: golang-github-hashicorp-serf- Service orchestration and management tool http://www.serfdom.io

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

Michael Scherer misc@zarb.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |misc@zarb.org Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |misc@zarb.org Flags| |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer misc@zarb.org ---

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

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

Issues: ======= - License should be tagged %license not %doc - Package should be no arch no matter the distribution

Since both can be fixed on upload and are not blocking, this package is approved.

===== 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: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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 [x]: 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 20480 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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [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: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: 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). [-]: Package functions as described. [-]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

Rpmlint ------- Checking: golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-devel-0-0.1.git367a65d.el7.centos.noarch.rpm golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-0-0.1.git367a65d.el7.centos.src.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Requires -------- golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): golang

Provides -------- golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-devel: golang(github.com/hashicorp/logutils) golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-devel

Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/hashicorp/logutils/archive/367a65d59043b4f846d179341d138f... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 9b2173d9277574adbc45400101cb0b65534a5cd3defe62eeb3bff652eeb3e34c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 9b2173d9277574adbc45400101cb0b65534a5cd3defe62eeb3bff652eeb3e34c

Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (18d98aa) last change: 2014-10-14 Command line :./try-fedora-review -b 1212056 Buildroot used: epel-7-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-0-0.1.git367a65d.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-0-0...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA

--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-0-0.1.git367a65d.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|golang-github-hashicorp-log |golang-github-hashicorp-log |utils-0-0.1.git367a65d.fc21 |utils-0-0.1.git367a65d.fc22

--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- golang-github-hashicorp-logutils-0-0.1.git367a65d.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212056

Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jeffschroeder@computer.org

--- Comment #11 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- *** Bug 1060580 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***