[Bug 1820805] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-gatt - Go package for building Bluetooth Low Energy peripherals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820805 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-06-22 10:05:43 -- 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 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820805] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-gatt - Go package for building Bluetooth Low Energy peripherals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820805 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter --- (In reply to Jakub Čajka from comment #3) > Thanks for adding bringing it up in upstream. I don't want to be overly > pedantic, but could you add breakdown in the comment near license section > that those libs are under MIT/expat license for the distribution build. > Otherwise looks good. Approved. Sure, I will add it before the import. Thanks for the review. -- 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 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820805] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-gatt - Go package for building Bluetooth Low Energy peripherals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820805 Jakub Čajka changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jakub Čajka --- (In reply to Fabian Affolter from comment #2) > (In reply to Jakub Čajka from comment #1) > > - Package contains bundled copies of libraries. xpc and gioctl under > > MIT/Expat license. It would be good to mention that in comment around > > License tag and add bundled provides > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling. I think > > that those libraries are rather minimal source libraries and it is fine to > > bundle them for time being(when tracked), possibly work with upstream to > > de-bundle them. > > It looks like that the bundled parts are included to fix build issues. I > opened an issue about the unbundling. > > Thanks for adding bringing it up in upstream. I don't want to be overly pedantic, but could you add breakdown in the comment near license section that those libs are under MIT/expat license for the distribution build. Otherwise looks good. Approved. -- 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 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820805] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-gatt - Go package for building Bluetooth Low Energy peripherals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820805 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter --- (In reply to Jakub Čajka from comment #1) > - Package contains bundled copies of libraries. xpc and gioctl under > MIT/Expat license. It would be good to mention that in comment around > License tag and add bundled provides > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling. I think > that those libraries are rather minimal source libraries and it is fine to > bundle them for time being(when tracked), possibly work with upstream to > de-bundle them. It looks like that the bundled parts are included to fix build issues. I opened an issue about the unbundling. %changelog * Thu Apr 23 2020 Fabian Affolter - 0-0.2.20200404git569d3d9 - Add details about the bundling (rhbz#1820805) Updated files: Spec URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/golang-github-bettercap-gatt.spec SRPM URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/golang-github-bettercap-gatt-0-0.2.20200423git569d3d9.fc31.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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820805] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-gatt - Go package for building Bluetooth Low Energy peripherals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820805
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Čajka ---
Generally looks good to me. I see one issue, see the review report.
Issues:
===
- Package contains bundled copies of libraries. xpc and gioctl under MIT/Expat
license. It would be good to mention that in comment around License tag and add
bundled provides
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling. I think
that those libraries are rather minimal source libraries and it is fine to
bundle them for time being(when tracked), possibly work with upstream to
de-bundle them.
= MUST items =
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]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[-]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
/usr/share/gocode/src/github.com(golang-github-dvsekhvalnov-jose2go-
devel, golang-github-opencontainers-runc-devel, golang-github-
...snip...
nrdcg-auroradns-devel, golang-github-tomnomnom-assetfinder-devel)
[-]: %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.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 14 files.
[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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin,
[Bug 1820805] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-gatt - Go package for building Bluetooth Low Energy peripherals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820805 Jakub Čajka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jca...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jca...@redhat.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820805] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-gatt - Go package for building Bluetooth Low Energy peripherals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820805 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1820915 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820915 [Bug 1820915] Review Request: bettercap - Tool for 802.11, BLE/Ethernet reconnaissance and MITM attacks -- 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 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
