[Bug 1223549] New: Review Request: nodejs-is-object - Checks whether a value is an object
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Bug ID: 1223549 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-is-object - Checks whether a value is an object Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: tom@compton.nu QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-is-object.spec SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc21.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: tomh
Description: Checks whether a value is an object.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |956806 (nodejs-reviews)
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806 [Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1223550
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223550 [Bug 1223550] Review Request: nodejs-fill-keys - Fill keys in a destination that are defined on the source
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Zuzana Svetlikova zsvetlik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |zsvetlik@redhat.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |zsvetlik@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Zuzana Svetlikova zsvetlik@redhat.com --- Doesn't build in mock. Maybe try putting tests in conditional along with devDependencies. Also nodejs-tape has different version, so use fixdep macro.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
--- Comment #2 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- It builds OK for me in mock, in F21 F22 and Rawhide. What's the error you are seeing?
Note that the tape version won't validated at all as nodejs-symlink-deps doesn't actually check versions (except for multi-version modules, to figure out which one to use) so it will just link in the one we have which works fine.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Zuzana Svetlikova zsvetlik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Zuzana Svetlikova zsvetlik@redhat.com --- Seems like fedora-review has some issues in F22. Looks fine, although I'd rather have all the devDependencies listed in spec file.
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". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/kasicka/fedrev/1223549-nodejs-is- object/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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 must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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 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: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [-]: 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. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [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: nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc22.noarch.rpm nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc22.src.rpm nodejs-is-object.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- nodejs-is-object.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Requires -------- nodejs-is-object (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs(engine)
Provides -------- nodejs-is-object: nodejs-is-object npm(is-object)
Source checksums ---------------- http://registry.npmjs.org/is-object/-/is-object-1.0.1.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 50675d09b265aaa84062a14a3f19bc8cd70b08a433d1cadb5d29f1102e84fee3 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 50675d09b265aaa84062a14a3f19bc8cd70b08a433d1cadb5d29f1102e84fee3
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1223549 Buildroot used: fedora-22-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: nodejs-is-object Short Description: Checks whether a value is an object Upstream URL: https://github.com/ljharb/is-object Owners: tomh Branches: f20 f21 f22
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc22
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223549
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc | |22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2015-06-05 20:05:43
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-is-object-1.0.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla