https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287822 --- Comment #7 from Adam Miller <admiller@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Troy Dawson from comment #5) > Note: I don't know why my rpmlist didn't understand ghost files, but I left > those in. > > Need to Fix: > - License file LICENSE is marked as %doc instead of %license > See: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > > - The clients and tuned-profiles-origin-node package can be installed without > the main package, which has the license. They to need a license > when installed. > > - There are several directories not owned by any package. All of them are > in > the origin-sdn-ovs package, so I suggest it get fixed there. > %{kube_plugin_path} > %{_unitdir}/docker.service.d/ > %{_unitdir}/origin-node.service.d/ > > Should Fix: > - If this package isn't going to be for older distributions, it would be > cleaner > to remove the %defattr > > - I agree with Michael Scherer that the description is very short. (But I > like the summary). If you go to the https://github.com/openshift/origin, > and you remove the first sentence, the rest of the description there is > pretty good. I suggest you add it for the description > > Debatable Fix: > - I think the big question Michael Scherer posts is whether you should be > totally true to the upstreams spec file. I believe the reason you want to > be is because this spec file is also building packages in COPR, so it would > be nice to not have to change it. > > -- If it is decided to deviate from upstream, then you should remove the > three things Michael said. > --- test for %if "%{dist}" == ".el7aos" > --- obsolete of file not found in fedora/epel > --- the comments that say the spec file was generated from upstream > > As well as the comment lines saying how bad this spec file is. I have updated based on feedback. The only thing I left in was the note about where the 'Provides: bundled' listing comes from just for posterity. I'll do my best to track upstream's spec work where applicable but will favor Fedora-specific requirements for sake of the Fedora package. Spec URL: https://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/origin.spec SRPM URL: https://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/origin-1.1-1.git.0.ac7a99a.fc23.src.rpm Description: OpenShift Open Source Container Management by Red Hat Fedora Account System Username: maxamillion I have a test build in COPR here: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/maxamillion/fedora-openshift/builds/ Looking forward to further review! Thank you, -AdamM -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review