Bug 1037898
Summary: | Review Request: python-fmn-consumer - Backend worker daemon for Fedora Notifications | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Ralph Bean <rbean> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | package-review, puiterwijk |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | puiterwijk:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2014-01-27 20:57:17 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 1037897 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Ralph Bean
2013-12-04 02:40:08 UTC
FYI, buildroot overrides have been created for the new dependencies python-fmn-rules and python-fmn-lib I will review this. Upstream release Spec URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-fmn-consumer.spec SRPM URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.fc20.src.rpm If anyone else wants to take it, go ahead, otherwise I'll do this tomorrow. 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. [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. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of 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 %doc. [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]: 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 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 Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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. [ ]: 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]: 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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.fc20.noarch.rpm python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.fc20.src.rpm python-fmn-consumer.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-fmn-lib python-fmn-consumer.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Backend -> Backed, Back end, Back-end python-fmn-consumer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backend -> backed, back end, back-end python-fmn-consumer.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Backend -> Backed, Back end, Back-end python-fmn-consumer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backend -> backed, back end, back-end 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint python-fmn-consumer python-fmn-consumer.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-fmn-lib python-fmn-consumer.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Backend -> Backed, Back end, Back-end python-fmn-consumer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backend -> backed, back end, back-end 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- python-fmn-consumer (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): fedmsg python(abi) python-fmn-lib python-requests Provides -------- python-fmn-consumer: python-fmn-consumer Source checksums ---------------- http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/f/fmn.consumer/fmn.consumer-0.2.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3697342bf7c9c1ea70264b808ab7ca105da3aae7bc88ebd17508d761f6c001c1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3697342bf7c9c1ea70264b808ab7ca105da3aae7bc88ebd17508d761f6c001c1 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1037898 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG Forgot to fill in: Final provides and requires are sane -> x. This package is APPROVED Thanks, Patrick! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-fmn-consumer Short Description: Backend worker daemon for Fedora Notifications Owners: ralph Branches: f20 f19 el6 InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.fc20 python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.fc19 python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.0-1.el6 python-fmn-consumer-0.2.1-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.1-1.el6 python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.fc20 python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.fc19 python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.el6 python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. python-fmn-consumer-0.2.2-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: python-fmn-consumer New Branches: epel7 Owners: ralph Git done (by process-git-requests). |