Bug 1425073

Summary: Review Request: php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha - Zend Framework ReCaptcha component
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Remi Collet <fedora>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: James Hogarth <james.hogarth>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: james.hogarth, package-review
Target Milestone: ---Flags: james.hogarth: fedora-review+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-03-10 14:50:38 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:

Comment 2 James Hogarth 2017-03-01 13:31:22 UTC
===== Issues =====

  * Extra boilerplate
    - Please remove the older el5 based boilerplate before import
  * Assuming package works as %check runs and passes
  * The phpci failed
    - phpci tried to look at a symlink pointing at nothing, not an issue
  * Dangling relative symlink in rpmlint
    - On checking an actual install it points to a valid file

===== 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: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 16 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/james/workspace
     /fedora-scm/1425073-php-zendframework-zendservice-
     recaptcha/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
     Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[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 20480 bytes in 4 files.
[!]: 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]: 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:
[!]: Buildroot is not present
     Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
[!]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
     Note: %clean present but not required
[-]: 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.
[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]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[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.

PHP:
[x]: Run phpci static analyze on all php files.
     Note: Test run failed


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-2.fc26.noarch.rpm
          php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-2.fc26.src.rpm
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://framework.zend.com/ HTTP Error 405: Method Not Allowed
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/php/ZendService/ReCaptcha/autoload.php ../../Zend/autoload.php
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Zend -> Zens, Zen, End
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Zend -> Zens, Zen, End
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.src: W: invalid-url URL: https://framework.zend.com/ HTTP Error 405: Method Not Allowed
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.src: W: strange-permission makesrc.sh 775
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.src: W: invalid-url Source0: 6c6877c07c8ac73b187911ea5d264a640b234361/php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-6c6877c.tgz
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://framework.zend.com/ HTTP Error 405: Method Not Allowed
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/php/ZendService/ReCaptcha/autoload.php ../../Zend/autoload.php
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.



Requires
--------
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    php(language)
    php-composer(zendframework/zend-http)
    php-composer(zendframework/zend-json)
    php-json



Provides
--------
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha:
    php-composer(zendframework/zendservice-recaptcha)
    php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha



Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1425073
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, PHP, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6


===== Conclusion =====

Package is APPROVED with the old boilerplate removed.

Comment 3 Remi Collet 2017-03-01 14:22:21 UTC
Thanks for the review.

New package requested on pkgdb.

Comment 4 Gwyn Ciesla 2017-03-01 16:10:53 UTC
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2017-03-02 08:19:10 UTC
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-3.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-4eb569d4aa

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2017-03-02 08:19:17 UTC
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-3.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-fce24c3d62

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2017-03-03 04:52:52 UTC
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-4eb569d4aa

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2017-03-03 05:23:49 UTC
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-3.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-fce24c3d62

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2017-03-10 14:50:38 UTC
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-3.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2017-03-10 15:20:48 UTC
php-zendframework-zendservice-recaptcha-3.0.0-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.