If the package name as reported by OBS does not match the one
we're expecting, then loop through all repositories and check
if we find one there.
This is weakening the policy a little as this will open the
door for false negatives - e.g. that got the right package name
only for another repository. But as we do submission between
code streams all the time, I can't limit the package parsing
to repositories building against the target. So the opened
hole is to be closed by sanity check on review-team - as a
matter of fact the policy is not to catch people playing
macro games around Name, but for people that use completely
different names in source and target.
Fixes#2274
The check for bcntsynctag can be very misleading - just because we align
the build counters between 2 packages doesn't make them invalid submission
targets. Better rely on the link check which is already implemented as
fallback
And set a verbose decline reason for this case
if package_kind() returned None then the submission can be a new package
submission, check_source should continue the process instead of
decline the request.
The benefit of this check is unclear to me. It enforces the Name tag
inside he kiwi file to be the same as the package name in OBS while the
kiwi file name itself can be arbitrary.
So that means that kiwi package names end up encoding their distribution
and version (eg "openSUSE-Leap-15.2-Vagrant") and have to be renamed for
each release. Also means diffing between released versions isn't as
straight forward as it could be if the name was more flexibel.
If we wanted to enforce something then we should make sure the actual
kiwi file name is the same as the OBS package name. That is what the
spec file name check actually does after all (package hello needs to
have hello.spec ie srpm name hello).
about missing whitelist entries and this is submitted to a project that
has this check activated via attribute OSRT:Config (add to
bad-rpmlint-entries)
This decline reason came from https://github.com/openSUSE/openSUSE-release-tools/pull/603
without much more context, so I'm guessing it's about delete requests for
e.g. kernel-default that should delete kernel-source
Packages that link to *other* projects basically do not exist in openSUSE
distributions but are very common in SLE service packs, so we need to diff
on this.
Fixes#1824
Allows tool to be used on multi-action requests while still enforcing
the rule for Factory and Leap which should reject such requests due to
staging process.
Exact name matching is thus always enforced for projects requiring devel
project enforcement (ie. Factory), but relaxed to compare without suffix
for packages coming from an :Update project.
SLE does not utilize devel projects and so adding such reviewer does not
make sense. Additionally, for Leap the right review will depend on origin
which leaper handles.
