Bug 1269287
| Summary: | Review Request: nodejs-when - A lightweight Promises/A+ and when() implementation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jared Smith <jsmith.fedora> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Tom Hughes <tom> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | package-review, tom |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | tom:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2015-11-13 19:26:13 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: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 956806, 1387531 | ||
|
Description
Jared Smith
2015-10-06 21:11:01 UTC
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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 41 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/tom/1269287
-nodejs-when/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 40960 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 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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[-]: 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).
[?]: 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.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
attached diff).
See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: nodejs-when-3.7.3-1.fc24.noarch.rpm
nodejs-when-3.7.3-1.fc24.src.rpm
nodejs-when.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j
nodejs-when.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US debuggability -> biodegradability
nodejs-when.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cujoJS
nodejs-when.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
nodejs-when.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
nodejs-when.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j
nodejs-when.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US debuggability -> biodegradability
nodejs-when.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cujoJS
nodejs-when.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
nodejs-when.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
nodejs-when.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/tom/1269287-nodejs-when/srpm/nodejs-when.spec 2015-10-06 22:27:53.298155751 +0100
+++ /home/tom/1269287-nodejs-when/srpm-unpacked/nodejs-when.spec 2015-10-06 21:40:38.000000000 +0100
@@ -49,4 +49,4 @@
%changelog
-* Mon Oct 5 2015 Jared Smith <jsmith> 3.7.3-1
+* Mon Oct 5 2015 Jared Smith <jsmith>
- Initial packaging
Requires
--------
nodejs-when (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
nodejs
nodejs(engine)
Provides
--------
nodejs-when:
nodejs-when
npm(when)
Source checksums
----------------
https://registry.npmjs.org/when/-/when-3.7.3.tgz :
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f51935057c2641f93edbbfad1701b4c374f99d1a5989c0e0afcbe820d3007f36
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f51935057c2641f93edbbfad1701b4c374f99d1a5989c0e0afcbe820d3007f36
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m compton-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1269287
Buildroot used: compton-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
There's a minor difference between the spec file posted and the one in the srpm - one of them is missing the version number on the changelog entry. Other than that the only issue is the tests, which aren't being run because they aren't in the npmjs.org package. It would be better if we could run them, but that would mean packaging from github instead. I've updated the spec file and the associated SRPM at the same locations listed above. I've fixed the inconsistency between the .spec file and the SRPM, as well as added (provisional) support for running the test suite. Unfortunately, the tests won't run right now because the test suite requires the "buster" package, which has not yet been packaged in Fedora, and itself has a long list of dependencies. As such, I've left the %global enable_tests set to 0, but this could easily be flipped in the future should someone package up buster. 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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 87 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/tom/1269287
-nodejs-when/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: 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 40960 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 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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[-]: 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[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: nodejs-when-3.7.3-1.fc24.noarch.rpm
nodejs-when-3.7.3-1.fc24.src.rpm
nodejs-when.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j
nodejs-when.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US debuggability -> biodegradability
nodejs-when.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cujoJS
nodejs-when.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
nodejs-when.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j
nodejs-when.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US debuggability -> biodegradability
nodejs-when.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cujoJS
nodejs-when.src: W: invalid-url Source1: tests-3.7.3.tar.bz2
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
nodejs-when.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Requires
--------
nodejs-when (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
nodejs
nodejs(engine)
Provides
--------
nodejs-when:
nodejs-when
npm(when)
Source checksums
----------------
https://registry.npmjs.org/when/-/when-3.7.3.tgz :
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f51935057c2641f93edbbfad1701b4c374f99d1a5989c0e0afcbe820d3007f36
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f51935057c2641f93edbbfad1701b4c374f99d1a5989c0e0afcbe820d3007f36
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m compton-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1269287
Buildroot used: compton-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
The mocha based recipe you put in for running the tests doesn't seem to work for me, but manually installing the necessary modules with npm and then running the tests per the recipe in packagae.json does, so we're all good on that front now I think. Only problem now is a missing hyphen before the version number in the spec changelog entry I think. Uploaded an updated spec file and SRPM. https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-when/nodejs-when.spec https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-when/nodejs-when-3.7.3-2.fc23.src.rpm Looks good - package is approved. nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-0e7bc9de20 nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-2fc879f3fc nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-73efb546d5 nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1d604dc222 nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update nodejs-when' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-0e7bc9de20 nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update nodejs-when' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-2fc879f3fc nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'yum --enablerepo=epel-testing update nodejs-when' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-73efb546d5 nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'yum --enablerepo=epel-testing update nodejs-when' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1d604dc222 nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. nodejs-when-3.7.3-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |