[Bug 1308354] New: Review Request: erlang-hamcrest - A framework for writing matcher objects allowing 'match' rules to be defined declaratively
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Bug ID: 1308354 Summary: Review Request: erlang-hamcrest - A framework for writing matcher objects allowing 'match' rules to be defined declaratively Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: lemenkov@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-hamcrest.spec SRPM URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Hamcrest is a framework for writing matcher objects allowing 'match' rules to be defined declaratively. There are a number of situations where matchers are invaluable, such as UI validation, or data filtering, but it is in the area of writing flexible tests that matchers are most commonly used. Fedora Account System Username: peter
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Randy Barlow rbarlow@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rbarlow@redhat.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |rbarlow@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Randy Barlow rbarlow@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring upstream-release-monitoring@fedoraproject.org --- peter's scratch build of erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12984096
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring upstream-release-monitoring@fedoraproject.org --- peter's scratch build of erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12984219
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #3 from Upstream Release Monitoring upstream-release-monitoring@fedoraproject.org --- peter's scratch build of erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12984268
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Fixed FTBFS in Rawhide:
* https://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-hamcrest.spec * https://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-2.fc23.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Randy Barlow rbarlow@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Randy Barlow rbarlow@redhat.com --- ACCEPTED so long as you fix the !'s in the MUST section below.
I added an rbarlow section at the end, but you can consider them suggestions and not requirements. If you want to keep it the way it is, that's fine by me!
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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/rbarlow/1308354 -erlang-hamcrest/licensecheck.txt rbarlow: you can write MIT and BSD to fix this. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/erlang/lib/hamcrest-0.1.0/include [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/erlang/lib/hamcrest-0.1.0/include [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [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. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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 20480 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 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]: 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. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: 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]: 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]: 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]: 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]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
These are are your option: rbarlow items: [!]: Consider using the _erlibdir macro instead of libdir/erlang/lib. [!]: Consider using the rebar macro instead of rebar directly. [!]: There's an rpmlint error about the summary being too long.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-2.fc24.src.rpm erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) matcher -> marcher, matches, catcher erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) declaratively -> declarative, decoratively, relatively erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: E: summary-too-long C A framework for writing matcher objects allowing 'match' rules to be defined declaratively erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matcher -> marcher, matches, catcher erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US declaratively -> declarative, decoratively, relatively erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matchers -> marchers, matches, catchers erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: E: no-binary erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib erlang-hamcrest.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) matcher -> marcher, matches, catcher erlang-hamcrest.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) declaratively -> declarative, decoratively, relatively erlang-hamcrest.src: E: summary-too-long C A framework for writing matcher objects allowing 'match' rules to be defined declaratively erlang-hamcrest.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matcher -> marcher, matches, catcher erlang-hamcrest.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US declaratively -> declarative, decoratively, relatively erlang-hamcrest.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matchers -> marchers, matches, catchers erlang-hamcrest.src:17: W: macro-in-comment %{upstream} erlang-hamcrest.src:17: W: macro-in-comment %{realname} erlang-hamcrest.src:17: W: macro-in-comment %{version} erlang-hamcrest.src:17: W: macro-in-comment %{realname} erlang-hamcrest.src:17: W: macro-in-comment %{version} erlang-hamcrest.src:33: W: macro-in-comment %setup erlang-hamcrest.src:33: W: macro-in-comment %{realname} erlang-hamcrest.src:33: W: macro-in-comment %{version} 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 19 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) matcher -> marcher, matches, catcher erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) declaratively -> declarative, decoratively, relatively erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: E: summary-too-long C A framework for writing matcher objects allowing 'match' rules to be defined declaratively erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matcher -> marcher, matches, catcher erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US declaratively -> declarative, decoratively, relatively erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matchers -> marchers, matches, catchers erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: E: no-binary erlang-hamcrest.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 6 warnings.
Requires -------- erlang-hamcrest (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): erlang-erts(x86-64) erlang-stdlib(x86-64)
Provides -------- erlang-hamcrest: erlang-hamcrest erlang-hamcrest(x86-64)
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/hyperthunk/hamcrest-erlang/archive/908a24fda4a46776a5135d... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d85a87447ea5e785ba6a3a2356122548c2a0cb759a57f42160146746145d4a01 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d85a87447ea5e785ba6a3a2356122548c2a0cb759a57f42160146746145d4a01
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1308354 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-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=1308354
--- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Thanks, Randy!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |erlang-hamcrest - A |erlang-hamcrest - A |framework for writing |framework for writing |matcher objects allowing |matcher objects using |'match' rules to be defined |declarative syntax |declaratively |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |erlang-hamcrest - A |erlang-hamcrest - A |framework for writing |framework for writing |matcher objects using |matcher objects using |declarative syntax |declarative rules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/erlang-hamcrest
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-2.fc2 | |4 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2016-02-16 10:10:22
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #8 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Thanks everyone!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ee6c679b3c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ON_QA Resolution|RAWHIDE |--- Keywords| |Reopened
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ee6c679b3c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-hamcrest-0.1.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308354
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed|2016-02-16 10:10:22 |2016-03-11 08:27:20
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla