Bug 1148956

APPROVED

xstatic/pkg ownership will be fixed in python-XStatic update.

As with all xstatic packages, please request that xstatic upstream keeps license files in the tarball.
Also to be fixed upstream is
Home-page: http://getbootstrap.org/
in PKG-INFO, it's bogus parked domain, correct is getbootstrap.com

===== 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.
[-]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     See above, getbootstrap.com claims MIT.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/xstatic/pkg
     TO BE fixed in python-XStatic update
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-
     packages/xstatic/pkg
     TO BE fixed in python-XStatic update
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
     Contains javascript files which have 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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]: 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.
[x]: 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:
[!]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
     Note: Package contains font files
     BUT /usr/share/javascript/bootstrap_scss/fonts/ are not meant to be
     used as general purpose fonts, so waiving this.
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
     from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
     As noted above, this needs to be fixed for xstatic packages.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[-]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[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.
[-]: %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-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc22.src.rpm
python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, footstools
python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, footstools
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS
python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, footstools
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python-XStatic
    web-assets-filesystem



Provides
--------
python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS:
    python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS



Source checksums
----------------
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/X/XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS/XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 7e9858737e2e6aac921ec7a3fca627e522901c3061611e154ebc0b8a892c7018
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 7e9858737e2e6aac921ec7a3fca627e522901c3061611e154ebc0b8a892c7018


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1148956 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-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

> [!]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
>      Note: Package contains font files
>      BUT /usr/share/javascript/bootstrap_scss/fonts/ are not meant to be
>      used as general purpose fonts, so waiving this.


This might be blocking issue after all, http://getbootstrap.com/components/ says:
"Includes 200 glyphs in font format from the Glyphicon Halflings set. Glyphicons Halflings are normally not available for free, but their creator has made them available for Bootstrap free of cost. As a thank you, we only ask that you include a link back to Glyphicons whenever possible."

This needs to be raised with fedora-legal, exact wording of boostrap/glyphicons agreement is unknown to me.

http://glyphicons.com/license/ says:
...

License for GLYPHICONS Halflings in Twitter Bootstrap

GLYPHICONS Halflings are also a part of Bootstrap from Twitter, and they are released under the same license as Bootstrap. While you are not required to include attribution on your Bootstrap-based projects, I would certainly appreciate a visible link back to GLYPHICONS.com in any place you find appropriate (footer, docs, etc).


In my understanding, the author appreciates to include a link, but it's not a requirement.

Ok, strings are not attached, it's just a nag to include a link back :)

re-approving

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS
Short Description: Bootstrap-SCSS (XStatic packaging standard)
Upstream URL: http://getbootstrap.com/
Owners: mrunge
Branches: epel7 f20 f21

Git done (by process-git-requests).

python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.el7

python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc21

python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc20

python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository.

python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.

python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.

python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS-3.2.0.0-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.