[Bug 1442576] New: Review Request: golang-github-restic-chunker - Implementation of Content Defined Chunking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442576
Bug ID: 1442576 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-restic-chunker - Implementation of Content Defined Chunking Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: phil@phib.io QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://phib.io/fedora/restic/golang-github-restic-chunker/golang-github-res... SRPM URL: https://phib.io/fedora/restic/golang-github-restic-chunker/golang-github-res...
Description: Implementation of Content Defined Chunking (CDC) in Go
This package is a dependency of #1432901
Fedora Account System Username: philphil
Copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/philphil/golang-github-restic-chunke... Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=19015780
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442576
--- Comment #1 from Philipp Baum phil@phib.io --- Urls Changed to: Spec URL: https://dev.phib.io/fedora/restic/golang-github-restic-chunker/golang-github... SRPM URL: https://dev.phib.io/fedora/restic/golang-github-restic-chunker/golang-github...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442576
Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |athoscribeiro@gmail.com Blocks| |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
--- Comment #2 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Hello Philipp,
I checked your FAS name [1] and as I see, you are not approved in the packager group yet. I suggest you read [2] if you did not do so yet. I am blocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR with this bug.
About your package:
- You should not generate an "empty" golang-github-restic-chunker with just a license file and a readme file. It's ok to generate just the -devel and the -unit-test subpackages if this package is a dependency for something else you want to package in Fedora. Note that if it is not a dependency for something, there is no point in packaging it: we recommend using 'go get' for development.
- There is no need for the content in the %%build section since there is no binary files associated with this package.
- You did disabled the builds of the devel and of the unit-tests subpackages, it means that this package generates a single binary package, with a README file and a LICENSE file. I do not believe that is useful at all. I guess you wanted to package, at least, the devel subpackage.
[1]
User: philphil Approved Groups: cla_done cla_fpca
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442576
Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |athoscribeiro@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442576
--- Comment #3 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Also, if you want to go on with the process to become a packager, it would be nice to see a few informal package reviews from you.
Read [1] and [2], find some packages you would like to review and do so in an informal way: do not assign the ticket for yourself and inform the packager that is an informal review. Make sure the package adheres to the packaging guidelines. You can post links to your informal reviews here in this ticket as you perform them.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com