Bug 2307641 - Review Request: rust-google-cloud-metadata - Google Cloud Platform rust client
Summary: Review Request: rust-google-cloud-metadata - Google Cloud Platform rust client
Keywords:
Status: RELEASE_PENDING
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Fabio Valentini
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://crates.io/crates/google-cloud...
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 2307663
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2024-08-23 19:35 UTC by Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)
Modified: 2024-09-09 08:57 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:
decathorpe: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 7939805 to 7939809 (1020 bytes, patch)
2024-08-24 03:28 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github yoshidan google-cloud-rust issues 303 0 None open Please include the MIT license file in crates 2024-09-03 10:00:11 UTC

Comment 1 Fabio Valentini 2024-08-23 19:55:14 UTC
Looks good to me - with two small exceptions.

1. Can you replace this:

```
%doc %{crate_instdir}/README.md
%{crate_instdir}/
%license LICENSE
```

with this:

```
%license %{crate_instdir}/LICENSE
%doc %{crate_instdir}/README.md
%{crate_instdir}/
```

Otherwise the LICENSE file will end up duplicated in the built package (once in /usr/share/licenses/rust-google-cloud-metadata/LICENSE and once in /usr/share/cargo/registry/google-cloud-metadata-0.5.0/LICENSE).

2. It would also be great if you could file a PR at https://github.com/yoshidan/google-cloud-rust to ensure LICENSE files are included in all published crates of this project? The MIT license file requires that redistributed sources contain a copy of the license text, so including the text manually in packaging should only be a temporary workaround.

Here's where I made similar changes in another project recently: https://github.com/rustls/rustls-platform-verifier/pull/110

PS: I wonder what you're packaging this for?

Comment 2 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2024-08-23 21:43:57 UTC
Hi Fabio,

Thanks for the review, I'll update the specs now.

These are all part of the dep tree for Taskwarrior v3 from the looks of it, so I'm going through them one by one.

https://github.com/GothenburgBitFactory/taskwarrior + https://github.com/GothenburgBitFactory/taskchampion/

Cheers,
Ankur

Comment 4 Fedora Review Service 2024-08-24 03:27:17 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7939805
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2307641-rust-google-cloud-metadata/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07939805-rust-google-cloud-metadata/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
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.

Comment 5 Fedora Review Service 2024-08-24 03:28:19 UTC
Created attachment 2044737 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 7939805 to 7939809

Comment 6 Fedora Review Service 2024-08-24 03:28:21 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7939809
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2307641-rust-google-cloud-metadata/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07939809-rust-google-cloud-metadata/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
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.

Comment 7 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2024-09-03 10:00:11 UTC
Hi Fabio,

I think this is ready for another round of review. I've filed an issue upstream about the inclusion of the license file. A lot of these google related crates all have the same repo, so I've only filed the one issue for the moment:

https://github.com/yoshidan/google-cloud-rust/issues/303

Cheers,

Comment 8 Fabio Valentini 2024-09-08 20:59:39 UTC
Thanks! Looks good to me now.
It also looks like a PR to add license files has been merged upstream, so the "missing license file" issue should hopefully go away with the next release.

===

Package was generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review.

✅ package contains only permissible content
✅ package builds and installs without errors on rawhide
✅ test suite is run and all unit tests pass
✅ latest version of the crate is packaged
✅ license matches upstream specification and is acceptable for Fedora
🫤 license file is included with %license in %files (temporarily manually included from upstream)
✅ package complies with Rust Packaging Guidelines

Package APPROVED.

===

Recommended post-import rust-sig tasks:

- set up package on release-monitoring.org:
  project: $crate
  homepage: https://crates.io/crates/$crate
  backend: crates.io
  version scheme: semantic
  version filter: alpha;beta;rc;pre
  distro: Fedora
  Package: rust-$crate

- add @rust-sig with "commit" access as package co-maintainer
  (should happen automatically)

- set bugzilla assignee overrides to @rust-sig (optional)

- track package in koschei for all built branches
  (should happen automatically once rust-sig is co-maintainer)

===

If you have any questions regarding maintenance of Rust packages, please stop by in the #rust (Fedora Rust) channel on Matrix.

Two things you might want to know up-front:

- For every new version, you MUST re-run rust2rpm to ensure the spec file is in sync with crate metadata. Just editing the "Version:" tag is not enough.

- We usually recommend to keep Rust crates in sync across all branches of Fedora, when possible, to make maintenance easier, and we have an official Updates Policy exception that covers this. but this does *not* extend to applications themselves.

Comment 9 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2024-09-09 08:57:35 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-google-cloud-metadata


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.