https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
Bug ID: 2297296 Summary: Re-Review Request: tinysparql - this is a renaming for tracker Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nmontero@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql.spec SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql-3.7.3-2.fc41.src.rpm Description: This is a renaming for the package tracker which is being renamed as tinysparql Fedora Account System Username: nmontero
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://gnome.pages.gitlab. | |gnome.org/tracker/
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7726783 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Found issues:
- No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/ - A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tracker Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicti... - Systemd user unit service file(s) in tracker Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_...
Please know that there can be false-positives.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #2 from Nieves nmontero@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql.spec SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql-3.7.3-2.fc41.src.rpm Description: This is a renaming for the package tracker which is being renamed as tinysparql Fedora Account System Username: nmontero
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
David King amigadave@amigadave.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |amigadave@amigadave.com
--- Comment #3 from David King amigadave@amigadave.com --- As a minimum, the packages inside the spec file should be renamed. Also, the automated review comments should be resolved (you can even run fedora-review locally to get more detailed review comments).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #4 from Nieves nmontero@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql.spec SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql-3.7.3-2.fc41.src.rpm Description: This is a renaming for the package tracker which is being renamed as tinysparql Fedora Account System Username: nmontero
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #5 from David King amigadave@amigadave.com --- You have not updated the packaging in a way that it builds, so please do that as a minimum before asking for review.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #6 from Nieves nmontero@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql.spec SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql-3.8.rc-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: This is a renaming for the package tracker which is being renamed as tinysparql Fedora Account System Username: nmontero
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2050236 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2050236&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 7726783 to 8105844
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8105844 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Found issues:
- No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/ - Systemd user unit service file(s) in tinysparql Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_...
Please know that there can be false-positives.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #9 from Nieves nmontero@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql.spec SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/tinysparql-3.8.rc-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: This is a renaming for the package tracker which is being renamed as tinysparql Fedora Account System Username: nmontero
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2050252 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2050252&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8105844 to 8105966
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8105966 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Found issues:
- Systemd user unit service file(s) in tinysparql Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_...
Please know that there can be false-positives.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297296
--- Comment #12 from David King amigadave@amigadave.com --- A few problems:
* the version string needs to include the '~' * no obsoletes or provides according to https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#renaming-or-repla... * includes outdated obsoletes and provides from the original package * includes the old changelog entries * the systemd unit name has not been updated (hence the warning from fedora-review)
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com