[Bug 976767] New: Review Request: nodejs-repl - A lightweight templating library for Node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Bug ID: 976767 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-repl - A lightweight templating library for Node.js Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: tchollingsworth@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews)
Spec: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/node_modules/nodejs-repl.spec SRPM: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/node_modules/nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19.src.rp... Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5527834 FAS: patches Description: A lightweight templating library for Node.js.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingsworth@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |976777
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jamielinux@fedoraproject.or | |g Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jamielinux@fedoraproject.or | |g Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- 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]: 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. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: %defattr present but not needed [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (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]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [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 %doc. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [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 [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).
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: %clean present but not required [x]: 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. [-]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [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]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [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.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Rpmlint ------- Checking: nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc20.noarch.rpm nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) templating -> contemplating, template, tempting nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-repl.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint nodejs-repl nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) templating -> contemplating, template, tempting nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting nodejs-repl.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-repl.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires -------- nodejs-repl (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs(engine)
Provides -------- nodejs-repl: nodejs-repl npm(repl)
Source checksums ---------------- http://registry.npmjs.org/repl/-/repl-0.1.3.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1a6e4786204dfadc09386fa3b24ca656ef773cdc08e171c25f954b1ae4e9e9c5 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1a6e4786204dfadc09386fa3b24ca656ef773cdc08e171c25f954b1ae4e9e9c5 https://raw.github.com/tchollingsworth/repl/8658350d7c0d1d4577f1a802de703280... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 44cafe5c0d7d1e321839f41b14c943a5fcda9a5fa119def0a5547522cf364250 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 44cafe5c0d7d1e321839f41b14c943a5fcda9a5fa119def0a5547522cf364250
Generated by fedora-review 0.4.1 (b2e211f) last change: 2013-04-29 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -r -n nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- Looks good, package approved!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #3 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: nodejs-repl Short Description: A lightweight templating library for Node.js Owners: patches jamielinux Branches: f18 f19 el6 InitialCC:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags| |fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
--- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.el6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 testing repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2013-06-23 17:26:20 Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19, nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19 |nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18, nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6,nodejs-repl-0.1.3-3.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6,nodejs-repl-0...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18 |nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6, nodejs-repl-0.1.3-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla