[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed|2016-10-03 02:56:41 |2016-11-13 10:20:10



-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |MODIFIED
 Blocks||1270525 (maxmind-db)
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #20 from Raphael Groner  ---
(In reply to Timotheus Pokorra from comment #18)
> I think there is not much benefit of upgrading the nunit package in Fedora
> 25 to NUnit3. There is no nunit gui stable yet, and no package requires
> nunit3 in Fedora 25.
> Therefore there is no need for nunit2 for compatibility reasons.
> I will drop the F25 branch for nunit2.

No. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270525#c10


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270525
[Bug 1270525] Review Request: maxmind-db - Reader for the MaxMind DB
Database Format
-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #19 from Timotheus Pokorra  ---
hmm, dropping the Fedora 25 branch would mean orphaning and retiring? I will
just keep it for the moment. Perhaps after the release of Fedora 25 we decide
to upgrade MonoDevelop for some reason, and then it will be good to have that
branch already available.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Timotheus Pokorra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2016-10-03 02:56:41



--- Comment #18 from Timotheus Pokorra  ---
I think there is not much benefit of upgrading the nunit package in Fedora 25
to NUnit3. There is no nunit gui stable yet, and no package requires nunit3 in
Fedora 25.
Therefore there is no need for nunit2 for compatibility reasons.
I will drop the F25 branch for nunit2.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST



--- Comment #17 from Raphael Groner  ---
Can we close here? Packages are available as of now in Rawhide and EPEL7. Maybe
you can also build a package for F25, as you requested the branch.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1354599



--- Comment #16 from Raphael Groner  ---
Please be also aware about bug #1354599.


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1354599
[Bug 1354599] RFE activate the tests during the package build
-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #15 from Timotheus Pokorra  ---
I have rebuilt all three packages for rawhide: newtonsoft-json, restsharp and
sharpziplib, using nunit2 instead of nunit.

I think there will be a mass rebuild for Fedora 26, since there has not been
one for Fedora 25. So we should catch any other packages that want NUnit 2 but
are using the nunit package. Of course, if we fix them earlier, the better.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #14 from Raphael Groner  ---
Approved all three packages and readded newtonsoft-json to Koschei. Please
don't add restsharp and sharpziplib to Koschei, currently there's no package
that uses both, so we don't need integration testing. Please correct me if I'm
wrong.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #13 from Timotheus Pokorra  ---
@Raphael, I have requested commit rights on those 3 packages.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||projects...@smart.ms



--- Comment #12 from Raphael Groner  ---
Can you please try to also rebuild sharpziplib, restsharp and newtonsoft-json
with the new nunit, I could give you commit rights to update the packages. All
three packages fail in koschei due to the broken nunit dependency. Sorry, I do
not have the time currently to do it by myself.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/nunit2

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|claudiorodrigo@pereyradiaz.
   ||com.ar



-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo  ---
@ Claudio maybe you should set the fields: "Assigned to" and "Status"

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #9 from Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz 
 ---
Look good for me.

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[-]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 1051 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /data/fedora/1366713-nunit2/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[-]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit-
 console-runner(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.mocks/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.framework(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.util(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.framework/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.mocks(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.util/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core.interfaces/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core.interfaces(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit-console-
 runner/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core(nunit)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package
 contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry.
 Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in nunit2-gui
[x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
 contains icons.
 Note: icons in nunit2-gui
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
 desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: 

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #8 from Timotheus Pokorra  ---
I have fixed the cp -p, and the ownership for /usr/lib/mono/nunit2, and the
requires name and isa.

I think I cannot do something for ownership for /usr/lib/mono/gac. Or is there
a way?

Regarding the review of other packages: I am not a detailer in that regard, if
it works I am happy, but that does not always meet the requirements of a
package in Fedora...

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||claudiorodrigo@pereyradiaz.
   ||com.ar



--- Comment #7 from Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz 
 ---
Need verify this points

[ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/mono/nunit2
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/mono/nunit2
[ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit-
 console-runner(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.mocks/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.framework(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.util(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.framework/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.mocks(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.util/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core.interfaces/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core.interfaces(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit-console-
 runner/2.6.4.0__96d09a1eb7f44a77(nunit),
 /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core(nunit)
[ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
 nunit2-doc

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #6 from gil cattaneo  ---
have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366835 ?

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo  ---
(In reply to Timotheus Pokorra from comment #4)
> I have fixed the install -p in those 2 lines, sorry I missed them earlier.
> The rest of the lines stayed the same, right?
> Or what is wrong about them?
cp -p src/GuiRunner/nunit-gui-exe/App.ico
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/icons/NUnit2/nunit.ico
to preserve timestamp

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #4 from Timotheus Pokorra  ---
I have fixed the install -p in those 2 lines, sorry I missed them earlier.
The rest of the lines stayed the same, right?
Or what is wrong about them?

Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/nunit2/nunit2.spec
SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/nunit2/nunit2-2.6.4-13.fc26.src.rpm

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo  ---
(In reply to Timotheus Pokorra from comment #2)
> Thanks Gil for those suggestions!
> I have adjusted the spec file and the src.rpm accordingly:
> 
> Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/nunit2/nunit2.spec
> SRPM URL:
> https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/nunit2/nunit2-2.6.4-13.fc26.src.rpm

have missing:
find %{_builddir}/%{?buildsubdir}/bin -name \*.dll -exec install -p \-m0755
"{}" "%{buildroot}%{_monodir}/nunit2/" \;
find %{_builddir}/%{?buildsubdir}/bin -name \*.exe -exec install -p \-m0755
"{}" "%{buildroot}%{_monodir}/nunit2/" \;
for i in nunit-console-runner.dll nunit.core.dll nunit.core.interfaces.dll
nunit.framework.dll nunit.mocks.dll nunit.util.dll ; do
gacutil -i %{buildroot}%{_monodir}/nunit2/$i -package nunit2 -root
%{buildroot}%{_monodir}/../
done
desktop-file-install --dir=%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications %{SOURCE4}
cp -p src/GuiRunner/nunit-gui-exe/App.ico
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/icons/NUnit2/nunit.ico

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713



--- Comment #2 from Timotheus Pokorra  ---
Thanks Gil for those suggestions!
I have adjusted the spec file and the src.rpm accordingly:

Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/nunit2/nunit2.spec
SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/nunit2/nunit2-2.6.4-13.fc26.src.rpm

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1366713] Review Request: nunit2 - unit-testing framework for .Net/ mono

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366713

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||punto...@libero.it



--- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo  ---
Please, use  "install -p" ..., and remove all useless Group field
and if possible replace %{__mkdir_p} with "mkdir -p"

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org