[Bug 1834947] New: Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Bug ID: 1834947
           Summary: Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Hardware: All
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
         Component: Package Review
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
          Assignee: [e-mail]
          Reporter: [e-mail]
        QA Contact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail]
  Target Milestone: ---
    Classification: Fedora

spec: https://svgames.pl/fedora/rust-desed-1.1.4-1/rust-desed.spec
srpm:
https://svgames.pl/fedora/rust-desed-1.1.4-1/rust-desed-1.1.4-1.fc32.src.rpm
koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=44422224

Description: desed is a debugger for sed scripts that allows you to inspect
them and demistify their inner workings.

Fedora Account System Username: suve

This is my first time packaging Rust stuff, so please forgive me if I made some
obvious mistakes.

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Igor Raits  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
           Assignee|[e-mail]    |[e-mail]
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #1 from Igor Raits  ---
Hi Artur,

Sorry for not getting to this review earlier. Just one question, was there a
reason to modify auto-generated spec except of the %license/%doc and some
description?
> License:        GPLv3

I think it should be rather GPLv3+, but I am not sure. Can you clarify it with
upstream?

Other than that, it seems Requires: sed is missing.

Otherwise, LGTM.

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

--- Comment #2 from Artur Iwicki  ---
> Just one question, was there a reason to modify auto-generated spec except of the %license/%doc and some description?

Not really. I guess after writing most specs by hand, personal preferences got
all tingly when confronted with the auto-generated one.
> > License:        GPLv3
>
> I think it should be rather GPLv3+, but I am not sure. Can you clarify it with upstream?

Asked upstream, they confirmed it to be GPLv3-or-later:
https://github.com/SoptikHa2/desed/issues/16
> Other than that, it seems Requires: sed is missing.

D'oh! You're right, having sed installed would be quite useful for this
package.

spec: https://svgames.pl/fedora/rust-desed-1.1.4-2/rust-desed.spec
srpm:
https://svgames.pl/fedora/rust-desed-1.1.4-2/rust-desed-1.1.4-2.fc32.src.rpm
koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=44501146

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Igor Raits  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |POST
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

--- Comment #3 from Igor Raits  ---
> Not really. I guess after writing most specs by hand, personal preferences got all tingly when confronted with the auto-generated one.

We (rust-sig) are usually, when updating rust stuff, just regenerate spec and
using `git add -p` to just commit changes which are not done manually (like
adding %license), so this would be inconvenient each time new version is
released :)
> Asked upstream, they confirmed it to be GPLv3-or-later: https://github.com/SoptikHa2/desed/issues/16

Great, thanks!

Licensing is correct, spec is auto-generated, nothing suspicious. APPROVED.

Please let me know if you are fine that I will add @rust-sig as default BZ
assignee and into the maintainers list.

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Igor Raits  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Alias|                            |rust-desed

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

--- Comment #4 from Artur Iwicki  ---
> We (rust-sig) are usually, when updating rust stuff, just regenerate spec and using `git add -p` to just commit changes

Well yeah, if the preferred workflow is something semi-automated like this,
then it makes sense to keep the spec as close to the auto-generated one as
possible. I'll keep this in mind if I ever need to package Rust stuff again.
> Please let me know if you are fine that I will add @rust-sig as default BZ assignee and into the maintainers list.

Sure.

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

--- Comment #5 from Igor Raits  ---
(In reply to Artur Iwicki from comment #4)
> > We (rust-sig) are usually, when updating rust stuff, just regenerate spec and using `git add -p` to just commit changes
>
> Well yeah, if the preferred workflow is something semi-automated like this,
> then it makes sense to keep the spec as close to the auto-generated one as
> possible. I'll keep this in mind if I ever need to package Rust stuff again.

Hopefully soon, the spec will look like:

Version: 1.2.3
Type: crate

and it will do all the stuff behind the scene :)

We are aiming to automate generation of subpackages in RPM upstream, though it
can take months until this will be done.
> > Please let me know if you are fine that I will add @rust-sig as default BZ assignee and into the maintainers list.
>
> Sure.

Cool, thanks!

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

--- Comment #6 from Igor Raits  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-desed

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|POST                        |MODIFIED

--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-f0df69576c has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-f0df69576c

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-6d9330c5d6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-6d9330c5d6

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Fedora Update System  changed:

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

--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-f0df69576c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2020-f0df69576c`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-f0df69576c

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

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-6d9330c5d6 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2020-6d9330c5d6`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-6d9330c5d6

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

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Fedora Update System  changed:

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

--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-bbc06105dd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-bbc06105dd

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Fedora Update System  changed:

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

--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-bbc06105dd has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2020-bbc06105dd`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-bbc06105dd

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

[Bug 1834947] Review Request: rust-desed - sed script debugger

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834947

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ON_QA                       |CLOSED
         Resolution|---                         |ERRATA
        Last Closed|                            |2020-11-02 01:10:39

--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-bbc06105dd has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.