Bug 1100870
Summary: | Review Request: perl-Parse-EDID - Extended display identification data parser | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | marianne <marianne> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Michael S. <misc> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | ddick, misc, package-review |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | misc:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2015-01-10 17:22:02 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: |
Description
marianne@tuxette.fr
2014-05-23 16:34:37 UTC
Hi Maryanne, I can't sponsor you, but i can offer you some help. The following patch shows suggested changes to your spec file. Explanations follow; --- perl-Parse-EDID.original 2014-05-24 08:33:55.978581987 +1000 +++ perl-Parse-EDID.spec 2014-05-24 08:48:28.184648360 +1000 @@ -1,15 +1,23 @@ Name: perl-Parse-EDID Version: 1.0.6 -Release: 0%{?dist} +Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Extended display identification data (EDID) parser License: GPLv3 Group: Development/Libraries URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Parse-EDID/ Source0: http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/G/GR/GROUSSE/Parse-EDID-%{version}.tar.gz -BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) BuildArch: noarch +BuildRequires: perl +BuildRequires: perl(base) +BuildRequires: perl(English) +BuildRequires: perl(Exporter) BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) +BuildRequires: perl(strict) +BuildRequires: perl(Test::Kwalitee) BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) >= 0.93 +BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod) +BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) +BuildRequires: perl(warnings) Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo $version)) %description @@ -34,12 +42,11 @@ make test %files -%defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc Changes LICENSE META.json README +%doc Changes LICENSE README %{perl_vendorlib}/* %{_mandir}/man3/* %changelog -* Wed May 21 2014 Marianne Lombard <marianne> 1.0.6-1 +* Wed May 21 2014 Marianne Lombard <marianne> - 1.0.6-1 - Adapting spec to actual guidelines - Specfile autogenerated by cpanspec 1.78. Explanations 1) Release: tags start from 1 2) BuildRoot: is only required for EPEL5 builds. Unless you want to build for EPEL5, you can remove this line 3) BuildRequires: perl - There are a variety of opinions on this BuildRequire, but i haven't seen anyone force it's removal 4) BuildRequires: perl(Test::Kwalitee) - I'm not really sure this is required, as it has no direct effect on the use of this module. I would consider this optional at best. 5) BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod) and perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) - Once again, a variety of opinions on this one, but i haven't seen anyone force it's removal. The positive effect this has you can be sure that when a "perldoc Parse::EDID" is executed, the user will not see a set of POD errors. 5) BuildRequires: All the other build requires can be found be grepping for 'use ' and 'require ' in the unpacked distribution. Specifying the exact module names helps to protect you if perl packages are split up, both in the CPAN packages, and the default set of packages available in the fedora build environment. 6) defattr(-,root,root,-) is only required for EPEL5 builds. 7) META.json is a file only intended for packaging. It has no use to the end user and may be removed. 8) Changelog just needed an extra dash to comply with rpm guidelines. Running rpmlint on your package will show this error. s/Maryanne/Marianne/g; sorry! updated spec according to review : SPECS : http://giverny.tuxette.fr/copr/perl-Parse-EDID/perl-Parse-EDID.spec SRPMS : http://giverny.tuxette.fr/copr/perl-Parse-EDID/perl-Parse-EDID-1.0.6-2.fc20.src.rpm Hi Marianne, If you reject part of a review, it will help if you explain why. That way, the reviewer will understand and modify the review according to your intentions. It will also show that you understand what is being asked of you. updated spec and new url : SPECS: http://giverny.tuxette.fr/~jehane/copr/perl-Parse-EDID/perl-Parse-EDID.spec SRPMS: http://giverny.tuxette.fr/~jehane/copr/perl-Parse-EDID/perl-Parse-EDID-1.0.6-2.fc21.src.rpm So the package is good, minus a few cleaning to do. ( mostly cleaning for old stuff, nothing blocking ). So approved, and i can sponsor you. 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: "GPL (v3 or later)". Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora/1100870-perl-Parse-EDID/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Parse(perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages, perl-Parse- CPAN-Distributions, perl-BackPAN-Index, perl-ParseTemplate, perl-Parse- Yapp, samba-pidl, perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages-Fast, perl-Parse-ErrorString- Perl, perl-Parse-RecDescent, perl-Parse-DebControl, perl-Parse-Method- Signatures, perl-Parse-CPAN-Meta, perl-ParseLex, perl-Parse-DMIDecode) [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: 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 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. Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 4 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]: 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 Perl: [x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires and Requires:. [x]: CPAN urls should be non-versioned. ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [!]: Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot: present but not needed [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. [-]: 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]: 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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [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: perl-Parse-EDID-1.0.6-2.fc20.noarch.rpm perl-Parse-EDID-1.0.6-2.fc20.src.rpm perl-Parse-EDID.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Parse/EDID.pm perl-Parse-EDID.src:13: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 13) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint perl-Parse-EDID perl-Parse-EDID.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Parse/EDID.pm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- perl-Parse-EDID (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.4) perl(Exporter) perl(base) perl(strict) perl(warnings) Provides -------- perl-Parse-EDID: perl(Parse::EDID) perl-Parse-EDID Source checksums ---------------- http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/G/GR/GROUSSE/Parse-EDID-1.0.6.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 12b949f0eaac6d39354cf9aee29083e4f9926be5e0b23a2ee49fccf4c836f4ee CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 12b949f0eaac6d39354cf9aee29083e4f9926be5e0b23a2ee49fccf4c836f4ee Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1100870 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Perl Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: perl-parse-EDID Short Description: Extended display identification data (EDID) parser Upstream URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Parse-EDID/ Owners: jehane Branches: f20 f21 el6 epel7 InitialCC: perl-sig WARNING: Requested package name perl-parse-EDID doesn't match bug summary perl-Parse-EDID, please correct. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: perl-Parse-EDID Short Description: Extended display identification data (EDID) parser Upstream URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Parse-EDID/ Owners: jehane Branches: f20 f21 el6 epel7 InitialCC: perl-sig Git done (by process-git-requests). |