[Bug 501576] New: Review Request: python-repoze-what-quickstart - A plugin enabling a simple authentication system with repoze.who and repoze.what
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: python-repoze-what-quickstart - A plugin enabling a simple authentication system with repoze.who and repoze.what
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Summary: Review Request: python-repoze-what-quickstart - A plugin enabling a simple authentication system with repoze.who and repoze.what Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: tcallawa@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: ---
Spec URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/python-repoze-what-quickst... SRPM URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/python-repoze-what-quickst... Description: This plugin allows you to take advantage of a rather simple, and usual, authentication and authorization setup, in which the users’ data, the groups and the permissions used in the application are all stored in a SQLAlchemy or Elixir-managed database.
Put simply, it configures repoze.who and repoze.what in one go so that you can have an authentication and authorization system working quickly – hence the name.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |501566, 476789, 479021, | |479020, 468227
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Bug 501576 depends on bug 468227, which changed state.
Bug 468227 Summary: Review Request: python-repoze-who - An identification and authentication framework for WSGI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468227
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Luke Macken lmacken@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lmacken@redhat.com
Bug 501576 depends on bug 501566, which changed state.
Bug 501566 Summary: Review Request: python-repoze-who-friendlyform - Collection of repoze.who friendly form plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501566
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #1 from Luke Macken lmacken@redhat.com 2009-06-01 22:03:26 EDT --- Spec URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-repoze-what-quickstart.spec SRPM URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-repoze-what-quickstart-1.0-2.fc1...
* Sun May 31 2009 Luke Macken lmacken@redhat.com - 1.0-2 - s/python-repoze-who-plugins-sql/python-repoze-what-plugins-sql/
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Bug 501576 depends on bug 479020, which changed state.
Bug 479020 Summary: Review Request: python-repoze-who-plugins-sa - The repoze.who SQLAlchemy plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479020
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Yaakov Nemoy loupgaroublond@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |loupgaroublond@gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |loupgaroublond@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review+, | |needinfo?(tcallawa@redhat.c | |om)
--- Comment #2 from Yaakov Nemoy loupgaroublond@gmail.com 2009-07-29 05:30:09 EDT --- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review.[1] [yankee@koan python-repoze-what-quickstart]$ rpmlint -iv * python-repoze-what-quickstart.src: I: checking python-repoze-what-quickstart.src: E: summary-too-long A plugin enabling a simple authentication system with repoze.who and repoze.what The "Summary:" must not exceed 79 characters.
python-repoze-what-quickstart.noarch: I: checking python-repoze-what-quickstart.noarch: E: summary-too-long A plugin enabling a simple authentication system with repoze.who and repoze.what The "Summary:" must not exceed 79 characters.
python-repoze-what-quickstart.src: I: checking python-repoze-what-quickstart.src: E: summary-too-long A plugin enabling a simple authentication system with repoze.who and repoze.what The "Summary:" must not exceed 79 characters.
3 packages and 2 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 0 warnings.
--CHECK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . --CHECK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] . --CHECK
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines . --CHECK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines . --CHECK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [3] --CHECK
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.[4] --CHECK
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] --CHECK
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] --CHECK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. --CHECK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [7] --CHECK
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. [8] --CHECK
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. --CHECK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9] --CHECK
MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10] --CHECK
MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [11] --CHECK
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. [12] --CHECK
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. [13] --CHECK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. [14] --CHECK
MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [15] --CHECK
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16] --CHECK
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17] --CHECK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [18] --CHECK
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. [18] --CHECK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [19] --CHECK
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [20] --CHECK
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). [21] --CHECK
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [19] --CHECK
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} [22] --CHECK
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built.[20] --CHECK
MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. [23] --CHECK
MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. [24] --CHECK
MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [25] --CHECK
MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [26] --CHECK
SHOULD Items: Items marked as SHOULD are things that the package (or reviewer) SHOULD do, but is not required to do.
SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [27] --FAIL, query upstream, you know what to do here
(more importantly, each file contains a license header, but there is no general license in the package as a whole, so use your best judgement here)
SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [28] --CHECK
SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [29] --CHECK
SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [30] --CHECK
SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. --CHECK
SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. [31] --CHECK
SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [22] --CHECK
SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. [21] --CHECK
SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [32] --CHECK
Resolution: PASS
Please note the following though. The files section is overly general, which is ok, but if you can, please try to make it more specific. I'm assuming you know what you're doing here.
Thanks for the submission!
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(tcallawa@redhat.c |fedora-cvs+ |om) |
--- Comment #3 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2009-07-29 10:59:45 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: python-repoze-what-quickstart Short Description: A plugin for a simple authentication system with repoze.who/what Owners: spot Branches: EL-5 F-10 F-11 devel InitialCC: lmacken
... and it's done.
I'll fix the file ownership before I commit, thanks.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
--- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2009-07-29 12:41:59 EDT --- This is built in rawhide, but due to other deps, isn't yet built for any other targets. Luke, feel free to kick off a build here when you get the other stuff straightened out.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |ON_QA
Bug 501576 depends on bug 476789, which changed state.
Bug 476789 Summary: Review Request: python-repoze-what - Authorization for WSGI applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476789
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution| |ERRATA
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-19 11:58:48 EDT --- python-repoze-what-quickstart-1.0-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update python-repoze-what-quickstart'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-0316
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Jan ONDREJ ondrejj@salstar.sk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |468230
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Nils Philippsen nphilipp@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nphilipp@redhat.com
--- Comment #6 from Nils Philippsen nphilipp@redhat.com 2009-09-23 17:43:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4)
This is built in rawhide, but due to other deps, isn't yet built for any other targets. Luke, feel free to kick off a build here when you get the other stuff straightened out.
This should be good to go for F-11, as python-repoze-what-plugins-sql should only need being pushed to stable (see bug #479021).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Bug 501576 depends on bug 479021, which changed state.
Bug 479021 Summary: Review Request: python-repoze-what-plugins-sql - The repoze.what SQL plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479021
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution| |ERRATA
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-09-30 16:16:10 EDT --- python-repoze-what-quickstart-1.0.1-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-repoze-what-quickstart-1.0.1-1...
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-03 15:02:47 EDT --- python-repoze-what-quickstart-1.0.1-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501576
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |1.0.1-1.fc11 Resolution| |ERRATA
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla