Bug 1164566
Summary: | Review Request: rubygem-power_assert - Power Assert for Ruby | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | František Dvořák <valtri> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | package-review, valtri, vondruch |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | valtri:
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: | 2014-12-03 01:30:44 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
Mamoru TASAKA
2014-11-16 15:13:00 UTC
It looks very good, no real issues found: 1) just a notice: the ruby(release) build dependency goes also from rubygems, but nothing needs to be changed here 2) there is newer version already recently released Thank you for review. https://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/gem-related/rubygem-power_assert.spec https://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/gem-related/rubygem-power_assert-0.2.2-1.fc.src.rpm * Thu Nov 27 2014 Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> - 0.2.2-1 - 0.2.2 - Kill unneeded BR I've also noticed: the LANG=ja_JP.utf8 for tests is probably not needed. Is there reason for it? The tests pass with LANG=C or with non-UTF-8 locales. But it can be removed post-review (if to remove it). Package APPROVED! Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== 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]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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]: 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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Ruby: [-]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform independent under %{gem_dir}. [x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage [x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated. [x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name} [x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel. [x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro. [x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch [x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi). ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages. Note: Package contains font files Part of generated documentation. [-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Package functions as described. ruby -e "require 'power_assert'" OK, -doc installs OK [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. Ruby: [x]: Specfile should use macros from rubygem-devel package. [x]: Gem package should exclude cached Gem. [x]: Gem should use %gem_install macro. [x]: Test suite should not be run by rake. [x]: Test suite of the library should be run. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: rubygem-power_assert-0.2.2-1.fc22.noarch.rpm rubygem-power_assert-doc-0.2.2-1.fc22.noarch.rpm rubygem-power_assert-0.2.2-1.fc22.src.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint rubygem-power_assert rubygem-power_assert-doc 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- rubygem-power_assert (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ruby(rubygems) rubygem-power_assert-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): rubygem-power_assert Provides -------- rubygem-power_assert: rubygem(power_assert) rubygem-power_assert rubygem-power_assert-doc: rubygem-power_assert-doc Source checksums ---------------- https://rubygems.org/gems/power_assert-0.2.2.gem : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ea8146b060a4da226f5d4519cb122a6572741f5354b7cc40f74147bcbe033558 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ea8146b060a4da226f5d4519cb122a6572741f5354b7cc40f74147bcbe033558 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1164566 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Ruby, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG (In reply to František Dvořák from comment #3) > I've also noticed: the LANG=ja_JP.utf8 for tests is probably not needed. Is > there reason for it? The tests pass with LANG=C or with non-UTF-8 locales. 0.2.1 failed without this, 0.2.2 seems okay, thank you for notifying this. Anyway thank you for review! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-power_assert Short Description: Power Assert for Ruby Upstream URL: https://github.com/k-tsj/power_assert Owners: mtasaka Branches: f20 f21 InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). Successfully built on all branches and push requests submitted, closing. Thank you for your help. Just a note that since power_assert is going to be shipped bundled with Ruby 2.2, the revision should probably get some treatment to win over the bundled version (e.g. something like rubygem-json or rubygems)? |