https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924918 --- Comment #9 from frederic.pierret@xxxxxxxxxxxx --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #8) > You added the signature file, but it's not used for anything… > > Please add URL: field with a link to the upstream project home page. Yes sorry I've literally forgot it while fixing stuff. > Is glibc-all-langpacks really necessary? That's a lot of data. What's needed in reprotest is several locales which are randomly changed for reproducible tests and I've not found any other alternative to this big package? Any other clue? > + package name is OK > + license is acceptable (GPLv3+) > + license is specified correctly > + builds and installs OK > + R/P/BR look OK > > rpmlint: > rpmlint reprotest-0.7.16-3.fc34.noarch.rpm reprotest-0.7.16-3.fc34.src.rpm > reprotest.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) reproducibility -> > reprehensibility (nice one ;)) > reprotest.noarch: W: no-url-tag (see above) > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/VirtSubproc.py > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/adt_testbed.py > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/adtlog.py > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/__init__.py > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/arch.py > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/debian.py > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/guix.py > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-chroot > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-lxc > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-lxd > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-null > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-qemu > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-schroot > reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-ssh > reprotest.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary reprotest > Hmm, IIRC, Debian requires a man page for every package, so there should be > one somewhere. Please also add it here if possible. > > 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 12 warnings. > > Package is APPROVED. > > Please note that the spec file in dist-git is the canonical version. > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > #_spec_maintenance_and_canonicity says: > > Maintainers MUST expect that other maintainers and automated tooling will make changes to their packages, > > potentially without communicating prior to doing so (though communication is always encouraged). If some > > maintainers are also attempting to keep copies of a spec in an outside repository, they MUST be prepared > > to merge changes made to the spec in Fedora’s repository, and MUST NOT overwrite those changes with a > > copy from an external repository > > i.e. if you want to keep the spec file in the upstream project, that is OK, > but occasionally you'll need > to move stuff manually to the version in upstream. Yes we plan to also use separate branch on upstream to maintain this spec. Notably, for possible OpenSUSE community to use it. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
