Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: drupal7-ctools - CTools module for Drupal 7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Summary: Review Request: drupal7-ctools - CTools module for Drupal 7 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jaredsmith@jaredsmith.net QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: ---
Spec URL: http://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/Drupal/drupal7-ctools/drupal7-ctool... SRPM URL: http://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/Drupal/drupal7-ctools/drupal7-ctool... Description: This package contains a set of APIs and tools which is heavily used by other Drupal modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Jared Smith jaredsmith@jaredsmith.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |stickster@gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |stickster@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(jaredsmith@jareds | |mith.net)
--- Comment #1 from Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com 2011-08-26 16:05:30 EDT --- $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/drupal7-ctools.spec rpmbuild/SRPMS/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15.src.rpm rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15.noarch.rpm drupal7-ctools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US responder -> responded, res ponder, res-ponder drupal7-ctools.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US responder -> responded, res ponder, res-ponder drupal7-ctools.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0-rc1 ['1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15', '1.0-0.1.rc1'] drupal7-ctools.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/drupal7-ctools-1.0/LICENSE.txt 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.
The spelling warnings can be ignored.
The third warning can be fixed by using one of the correct versions. (I prefer the second since you can then reuse the content for other branches more easily.)
The error should be reported upstream, but you can use a current copy of the correct LICENSE file from the FSF, since upstream intent is clear (GPLv2+).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Jared Smith jaredsmith@jaredsmith.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(jaredsmith@jareds | |mith.net) |
--- Comment #2 from Jared Smith jaredsmith@jaredsmith.net 2011-09-11 13:07:01 EDT --- Update version which should fix the warnings (except for the spelling warnings).
http://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/Drupal/drupal7-ctools/drupal7-ctool... http://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/Drupal/drupal7-ctools/drupal7-ctool...
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com 2011-09-11 13:26:21 EDT --- [ O K ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review.
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/drupal7-ctools.spec rpmbuild/SRPMS/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15.src.rpm rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15.noarch.rpm drupal7-ctools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US responder -> responded, res ponder, res-ponder drupal7-ctools.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US responder -> responded, res ponder, res-ponder 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines.
[ O K ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[ O K ] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[ O K ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
$ md5sum rpmbuild/SOURCES/ctools-7.x-1.0-rc1.tar.gz; curl -s -o - http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/ctools-7.x-1.0-rc1.tar.gz | md5sum - 39bcea671210505409e3148c8eaefc0e rpmbuild/SOURCES/ctools-7.x-1.0-rc1.tar.gz 39bcea671210505409e3148c8eaefc0e -
[ O K ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture.
[ O K ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[ O K ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[ O K ] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[ O K ] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[ O K ] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker.
[ O K ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory.
[ O K ] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
[ O K ] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line.
[ O K ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[ O K ] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
[ O K ] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present.
[ O K ] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[ O K ] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[ O K ] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package.
[ O K ] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
[ O K ] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built.
[ O K ] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
[ O K ] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time.
[ O K ] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Jared Smith jsmith.fedora@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Jared Smith jsmith.fedora@gmail.com 2011-09-14 15:27:00 EDT --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: drupal7-ctools Short Description: CTools module for Drupal 7 Owners: jsmith Branches: f15 f16 el5 el6 InitialCC:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-09-14 15:47:50 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-20 17:52:55 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.el6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-20 18:40:06 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.el5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-20 21:41:55 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc16
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-20 22:06:38 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-21 18:13:35 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 14:36:11 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1. | |fc16 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2011-09-30 14:36:16
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-02 19:05:36 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1. |drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1. |fc16 |fc15
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1. |drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1. |fc15 |el5
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-10 22:02:42 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1. |drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1. |el5 |el6
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-10 22:03:10 EDT --- drupal7-ctools-1.0-0.1.rc1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730560
Björn "besser82" Esser bjoern.esser@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla