https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785365
Bug ID: 1785365 Summary: Review Request: gap-pkg-caratinterface - GAP interface to CARAT Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganjerry@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-caratinterface/gap-pkg-caratinterfac... SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-caratinterface/gap-pkg-caratinterfac... Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: This is a rename review. The current package is gap-pkg-carat, but upstream decided to change the name.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785365
Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST CC| |zebob.m@gmail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |zebob.m@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- - Please ask upstream to fix their FSF address if you can:
gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-caratinterface/GPL
Package approved.
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License (v2 or later)". 32 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/gap-pkg- caratinterface/review-gap-pkg-caratinterface/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: 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 10240 bytes in 2 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]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [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 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). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: 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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %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, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: gap-pkg-caratinterface-2.3.2-1.fc32.noarch.rpm gap-pkg-caratinterface-doc-2.3.2-1.fc32.noarch.rpm gap-pkg-caratinterface-2.3.2-1.fc32.src.rpm gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Opgenorth -> Northrop gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Plesken -> Spleen gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US für -> fr, fer, fir gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normalizers -> normalizes, normalize rs, normalize-rs gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conjugators -> conjugates, conjugation, conjugate gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US unimodular -> uni modular, uni-modular, modular gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Cryst -> Crest, Tryst, Crust gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib gap-pkg-caratinterface.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-caratinterface/GPL gap-pkg-caratinterface-doc.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib gap-pkg-caratinterface-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation gap-pkg-caratinterface.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Opgenorth -> Northrop gap-pkg-caratinterface.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Plesken -> Spleen gap-pkg-caratinterface.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US für -> fr, fer, fir gap-pkg-caratinterface.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normalizers -> normalizes, normalize rs, normalize-rs gap-pkg-caratinterface.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conjugators -> conjugates, conjugation, conjugate gap-pkg-caratinterface.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US unimodular -> uni modular, uni-modular, modular gap-pkg-caratinterface.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Cryst -> Crest, Tryst, Crust 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 17 warnings.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785365
--- Comment #2 from Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com --- Thanks for the review!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785365
--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gap-pkg-caratinterface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785365
Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2019-12-31 21:42:34
--- Comment #4 from Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com --- Built in Rawhide.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com