https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
Bug ID: 1994234 Summary: Review Request: rust-escape_string - Very efficiently parse backslash-escaped strings Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcavalca@fb.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-escape_string/rust-escape_stri... SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-escape_string/rust-escape_stri...
Description: Very efficiently parse backslash-escaped strings.
Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #1 from Davide Cavalca dcavalca@fb.com --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=73990604
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value CC| |decathorpe@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- The BSD-2-Clause license requires redistributed sources to contain a copy of the license text. This is not the case here, the crate is published without a LICENSE file.
Please report this issue upstream (while this crate is old, upstream is still active). Adding a symlink to the LICENSE file that sits at the root of the project's GitHub repo should be enough to make "cargo publish" include the LICENSE file next time they publish a version for escape_string.
In the meantime, you could include that LICENSE file as a second source file, since it is obvious that it is the file that should apply to this (sub-)project too.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
Davide Cavalca dcavalca@fb.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link ID| |Github | |njaard/sonnerie/pull/14
--- Comment #4 from Davide Cavalca dcavalca@fb.com --- Put up https://github.com/njaard/sonnerie/pull/14 to get the license sorted out upstream.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #5 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- I don't know what happened, the pull request was closed as "Merged", but the change does not show up in the master branch. Maybe the developer accidentally force-pushed changes that overwrote your changes from the PR?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zbyszek@in.waw.pl
--- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl --- Maybe it'd be easier to just include the license file as SOURCE1 until this is resolved upstream? Also should be re-generated with rust2rpm-21 now.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #7 from Davide Cavalca dcavalca@fb.com --- Not sure what happened either, but I've commented on the original PR and added LICENSE as an extra Source for now.
Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-escape_string/rust-escape_stri... SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-escape_string/rust-escape_stri...
Changelog: - rerun rust2rpm - update to 0.1.2 - add missing LICENSE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |zbyszek@in.waw.pl
--- Comment #8 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl --- + package name is OK + license is acceptable for Fedora (BSD) + license is specified correctly + latest version + builds and installs OK + latest rust2rpm was used
Hmm,the license file is now listed twice. Please change - %license LICENSE + %license %{crate_instdir}/LICENSE (That'll generate a warning about the file being listed twice, but that's a known issue.)
With that change, rpmlint only says: no-documentation, strange-permission, which are both irrelevant.
Package is APPROVED.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #9 from Davide Cavalca dcavalca@fb.com --- Thanks! I'll fix the LICENSE thing on import.
$ fedpkg request-repo rust-escape_string 1994234 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/45513
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #10 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-escape_string
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-8faf7bbb7e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-8faf7bbb7e
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Last Closed| |2022-07-06 20:15:03
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-8faf7bbb7e has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-6de15e8f0f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-6de15e8f0f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-49275a02f9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-49275a02f9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-6de15e8f0f has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-6de15e8f0f *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-6de15e8f0f
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-49275a02f9 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-49275a02f9 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-49275a02f9
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-6de15e8f0f has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994234
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-49275a02f9 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org