Thanks @sgeorget for the review request! I’m sure you figured this already, but note that it’s likely to be a bit of a delay before this one gets processed with the end of year coming up. I would guess that the review probably won’t start before January, sorry.
@reneradoi can you please help with this review? You can go through and
tick off the items on the checklist
and post the result in this thread. This prior listing request could serve as an example of how to go about it. Please ping
me or anyone else from Charm-Tech for any questions.
The review for the source code has been conducted. The overall quality of code, docs, tests and automation is pretty good, only some minor topics have been added as a comment here.
Before confirming the “publication readiness”, the requested change (replacing passlib module) should be implemented. Other than that, there are no concerns from my side.
Once the PR has been updated, I will add the review checklist here, too.
Review PR has been approved, possible alternatives for the deprecated dependencies have been found. Implementation will be coordinated by the team itself.
@tony-meyer The review is done from my side. Could you please take over again to fulfill the next steps for the listing?
Thank you!
René
Review checklist:
Checked
Review item
Objective
Review criteria
Intended functionality
Despite all the items for publication readiness, the charm must work.
Charm does what it is meant to do - ideally done in a demo.
A complete and consistent appearance of the charm is required for a quality impression of the charm collection.
The overall appearance looks good, which means: * The name complies with the naming guidelines. * The publisher is identified. * The links are provided. * The documentation looks reasonable.
Source repository
Generally, the source code for charms must be accessible by the community for transparency and collaboration.
It is not entirely mandatory to have the charm published as OSS for review, but the repository must be accessible from the persons working on the review request.
Coding conventions
The source code of the charm is accessible in the sense of approachability. Consistent source code style and formatting are also considered a sign of being committed to quality.
The implemented checks for coding conventions are reasonable and implemented in the regular CI/CD implementation.
Release automation implementation
An implementation for automated releasing to charmhub.io improves the ability to provide updates covering vulnerabilities quickly.
Release automation for unstable channels to enable testing when new versions of the charm code or the workload become available.
Unit tests implementation
In particular, for the charms review, assuring a reasonable test suite is essential to allow for automated releases in future.
The unit tests show relevant coverage. It is a case-dependent review.At the time of review, the test runs successfully.
Unit tests results
Availability of test results is mandatory for a working collaborative project.
URL to test results from CI/CD automation.
Installation test implemented (could be part of the integration test)
In particular, for the charm review, assuring a reasonable test suite is essential to allow for automated releases in future. With this test, for every build, it is ensured that the installation is successful.
An implementation for checking the installation is present. The implementation should also check for successful installation as part of the automation, and the workload behaves as expected. At the time of review, the test runs successfully.
Installation test results
Availability of test results is mandatory for a working collaborative project.
URL to test results from CI/CD automation.
Integration tests implemented
In particular for the review of charms, assuring a reasonable test suite is important to allow for automated releases in future. With this test, for every build, it is ensured that the integration with other charms is successful.
An implementation for testing the required integrations (if applicable) is present. The implementation should also check for successful integration as part of he automation and the workload behaves as expected. At the time of review, the test runs successfully.
Integration test results
Availability of test results is mandatory for a working collaborative project.
URL to test results from CI/CD automation.
Documentation for usage
The documentation for using the charm should be separate from the documentation for developing or contributing to the charm.
URL to this documentation is present.
Documentation for contributing
The documentation for contributing to the charm should be separate from the documentation for developing or using the charm.
URL to this documentation is present.
Licensing statement
For the charm shared, OSS or not, the licensing terms of the charm are clarified (which also implies an identified authorship of the charm).
