Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: atf - Automated Testing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815135 Summary: Review Request: atf - Automated Testing Framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ReportedBy: jmmv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx QAContact: extras-qa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx CC: notting@xxxxxxxxxx, package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/jmmv/fedora/atf.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/jmmv/fedora/atf-0.15-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: ATF is a testing framework: it provides libraries for C, C++ and sh to aid developers in writing tests, and it includes a set of tools to allow end users to run such tests in an automated manner (without having to have developer-only tools installed!). ATF is the testing framework currently used in the NetBSD operating system. ----- A few random things: * The end-user tools included in ATF are deprecated in favor of Kyua, although the libraries are alive and will still be for a while. A package for Kyua itself will be coming "soon" after this one. * One thing that makes ATF different from other testing frameworks is that its tools are designed to be able to run "installed tests". The installation of tests is controversial because the location that ATF currently expects is not within the expectations of the LSB nor the directory structure of Fedora. Because I would like to make an initial package for Fedora available, I have chosen to NOT install any of the tests provided by ATF. This way, I can leave the controversial decision for a latter stage, at which point we can make a new revision of the package to include new subpackages to provide the tests. Some context can be found in this discussion: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2012-February/008128.html The installation of tests is, of course, optional. The current package works just fine and allows users to develop their own tests using the libraries. * Here is the output of rpmlint: SPECS/atf.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://kyua.googlecode.com/files/atf-0.15.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found atf.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://kyua.googlecode.com/files/atf-0.15.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found atf.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/atf-config libatf-c++.x86_64: W: no-documentation libatf-c.x86_64: W: no-documentation 9 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. The warning about invalid-url is expected and can be ignored. Not sure if the no-documentation warning is important for the subpackages. There is nothing useful that I could install... The warning about atf-config is not accurate, because atf-config is a tool for users to query the current configuration of ATF; it's not the same as "pkg-config". Wish I'd tag this condition in the spec file itself to permanently suppress the warning, but rpmlint does not seem to support this. * The 'atf' package contains a long description, while all the subpackages contain a tiny description. I think it'd be nice if all of these subdescriptions contained the generic description of ATF. However, I'm not sure if that's desirable (standard practice), or if there is a way to do it without having to copy/paste the same text multiple times. And, as usual, thanks for the review! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review