Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/weak-map/nodejs-weak-map.spec SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/weak-map/SRPMS/nodejs-weak-map-1.0.4-1.fc21.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jamielinux Description: WeakMap is a collection introduced to JavaScript with EcmaScript 6. It provides a mapping from objects to values, but allows any entry to be garbage collected if the key is provably lost. In order for it to be possible that a key is provably lost, weak maps do not provide a way to access the key list. This is a Node.js module that provides a shim and patcher for missing or broken WeakMap implementations, suitable for use in Node.js and browsers that provide the EcmaScript 5 property description interfaces.
Well there is fairly clearly a bundling issue here - the source archive actually has a script that generates weak-map.js by downloading a file from another package and patching it.
Oops. I didn't notice that at all :(
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/424
Bundling exception has been approved.
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. [-]: 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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 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 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]: 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 ===== 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. [!]: 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]: %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]: 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]: 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-weak-map-1.0.4-1.fc21.noarch.rpm nodejs-weak-map-1.0.4-1.fc21.src.rpm nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US patcher -> patchier, patches, pitcher nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-weak-map.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US patcher -> patchier, patches, pitcher 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint nodejs-weak-map nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US patcher -> patchier, patches, pitcher nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- nodejs-weak-map (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs(engine) Provides -------- nodejs-weak-map: nodejs-weak-map npm(weak-map) Source checksums ---------------- http://registry.npmjs.org/weak-map/-/weak-map-1.0.4.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b6557cce7e112da7ea440e18631804460571228995897e7bff64963801268b7c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b6557cce7e112da7ea440e18631804460571228995897e7bff64963801268b7c Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m compton-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1089494 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, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
Needs updating to the 1.0.5 release but other than that I think this is good to go.
Thanks for the review, and sorry for the delay! Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/weak-map/nodejs-weak-map.spec SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/weak-map/SRPMS/nodejs-weak-map-1.0.5-1.fc21.src.rpm * Sat Jun 28 2014 Jamie Nguyen <jamielinux> - 1.0.5-1 - update to upstream release 1.0.5 - tests have been removed from NPM tarball so download separately
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. [-]: 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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 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 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]: 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 ===== 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]: 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]: 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-weak-map-1.0.5-1.fc21.noarch.rpm nodejs-weak-map-1.0.5-1.fc21.src.rpm nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US patcher -> patchier, patches, pitcher nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-weak-map.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US patcher -> patchier, patches, pitcher nodejs-weak-map.src: W: invalid-url Source1: tests-v1.0.5.tar.bz2 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint nodejs-weak-map nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US patcher -> patchier, patches, pitcher nodejs-weak-map.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- nodejs-weak-map (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs(engine) Provides -------- nodejs-weak-map: nodejs-weak-map npm(weak-map) Source checksums ---------------- http://registry.npmjs.org/weak-map/-/weak-map-1.0.5.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b3d62642198abc30fb6b646c60bbc1bec600e533373c6320e5ef152ff734b0d7 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b3d62642198abc30fb6b646c60bbc1bec600e533373c6320e5ef152ff734b0d7 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m compton-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1089494 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, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
Looks good now. Package approved.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: nodejs-weak-map Short Description: A WeakMap shim for Node.js and browsers Upstream URL: https://github.com/drses/weak-map Owners: jamielinux patches Branches: f19 f20 el6 epel7 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).