Spec URL: https://mayorga.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-flot.spec SRPM URL: https://mayorga.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-flot-0.8.0-0.1.alpha.fc22.src.rpm Description: Flot is a Javascript plotting library for jQuery. Fedora Account System Username: mayorga
available http://www.flotcharts.org/downloads/flot-0.8.3.zip please consider upgrading
Taking review. Several quick remarks: 1. 0.8.3 is available from upstream, but you need to get the source from git, otherwise it doesn't include all the files necessary for build. I think commit 958e5fd43c6dff4bab3e1fd5cb6109df5c1e8003 is the right one for 0.8.3, but please verify. 2. Upstream uses yui-compressor JS minifier, which is not packaged for Fedora yet. You can use uglify-js or any other instead. 3. It bundles excanvas and jquery, these need to be removed.
(In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #2) > Taking review. > > Several quick remarks: > 1. 0.8.3 is available from upstream, but you need to get the source from > git, otherwise it doesn't include all the files necessary for build. > I think commit 958e5fd43c6dff4bab3e1fd5cb6109df5c1e8003 is the right one for > 0.8.3, but please verify. > > 2. Upstream uses yui-compressor JS minifier, which is not packaged for > Fedora yet. You can use uglify-js or any other instead. for fedora is not importable yui-compressor. use too old rhino library > 3. It bundles excanvas and jquery, these need to be removed. also the release you packaged
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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1246721-nodejs- flot/licensecheck.txt ASL 2.0 excanvas.js [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/licenses/nodejs- flot(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/lib/node_modules/flot(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/share/doc/nodejs-flot(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No) [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. excanvas.js jquery.js [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 [-]: 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]: 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: [-]: 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]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: 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. [?]: %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]: 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-flot-0.8.0-0.1.alpha.fc23.noarch.rpm nodejs-flot-0.8.0-0.1.alpha.fc23.src.rpm nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javascript -> JavaScript, Java script, Java-script nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US www -> WWW, wow nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US flotcharts -> flowcharts, flowchart nodejs-flot.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-flot.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/node_modules/flot/jquery.flot.selection.js nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javascript -> JavaScript, Java script, Java-script nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US www -> WWW, wow nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US flotcharts -> flowcharts, flowchart 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 13 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: File o directory non esistente nodejs-flot.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-flot.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/node_modules/flot/jquery.flot.selection.js 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- nodejs-flot (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs(engine) Provides -------- nodejs-flot: nodejs-flot npm(flot) Source checksums ---------------- http://registry.npmjs.org/flot/-/flot-0.8.0-alpha.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : bd2cc55b5dc99e20c19425909596bdc260adbcb9248de24fe86e11722201d6b7 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : bd2cc55b5dc99e20c19425909596bdc260adbcb9248de24fe86e11722201d6b7 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -b 1246721 -m fedora-rawhide-i386 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 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
Blocking issues: [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. excanvas.js jquery.js
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > (In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #2) > > Taking review. > > 2. Upstream uses yui-compressor JS minifier, which is not packaged for > > Fedora yet. You can use uglify-js or any other instead. > for fedora is not importable yui-compressor. use too old rhino library can you try with closure-compiler
e.g. sed -i 's|yui-compressor $< -o $@|closure-compiler $(CLOSURE_FLAGS) --js=$< >$@|' Makefile %build make %{?_smp_mflags} output: + make -j4 closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.symbol.js >jquery.flot.symbol.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.stack.js >jquery.flot.stack.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.crosshair.js >jquery.flot.crosshair.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.navigate.js >jquery.flot.navigate.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.errorbars.js >jquery.flot.errorbars.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.resize.js >jquery.flot.resize.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.time.js >jquery.flot.time.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.js >jquery.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.pie.js >jquery.flot.pie.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.colorhelpers.js >jquery.colorhelpers.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.categories.js >jquery.flot.categories.min.js jquery.js:2588: WARNING - Suspicious code. This code lacks side-effects. Is there a bug? if ( parent ) { ^ jquery.js:2589: WARNING - Suspicious code. The result of the 'getprop' operator is not being used. parent.selectedIndex; ^ jquery.js:2592: WARNING - Suspicious code. This code lacks side-effects. Is there a bug? if ( parent.parentNode ) { ^ jquery.js:2593: WARNING - Suspicious code. The result of the 'getprop' operator is not being used. parent.parentNode.selectedIndex; ^ jquery.js:3868: WARNING - Suspicious code. The result of the 'getprop' operator is not being used. slice.call( docElem.childNodes, 0 )[0].nodeType; ^ jquery.js:4448: WARNING - Suspicious code. This code lacks side-effects. Is there a bug? if ( elem.parentNode ) { ^ jquery.js:4449: WARNING - Suspicious code. The result of the 'getprop' operator is not being used. elem.parentNode.selectedIndex; ^ 0 error(s), 7 warning(s) closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.fillbetween.js >jquery.flot.fillbetween.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.threshold.js >jquery.flot.threshold.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.image.js >jquery.flot.image.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.js >jquery.flot.min.js closure-compiler --js=jquery.flot.selection.js >jquery.flot.selection.min.js
Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~mayorga/nodejs-flot.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~mayorga/nodejs-flot-0.8.3-1.fc22.src.rpm * Sat Jul 25 2015 Eduardo Mayorga Téllez <mayorga> - 0.8.3-1 - Update to 0.8.3 - Unbundling excanvas and jquery - Minify with closure-compiler instead of yui-compressor
(In reply to Eduardo Mayorga from comment #8) > Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~mayorga/nodejs-flot.spec > SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~mayorga/nodejs-flot-0.8.3-1.fc22.src.rpm > > * Sat Jul 25 2015 Eduardo Mayorga Téllez <mayorga> - > 0.8.3-1 > - Update to 0.8.3 > - Unbundling excanvas and jquery > - Minify with closure-compiler instead of yui-compressor if necessary can add export CLOSURE_FLAGS="--language_in=ECMASCRIPT5" before exec make
Done. Spec URL: https://mayorga.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-flot.spec SRPM URL: https://mayorga.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-flot-0.8.3-2.fc22.src.rpm
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1246721-nodejs- flot/licensecheck.txt Please, report the problem to upstream, for add license header Unknown or generated -------------------- flot-0.8.3/jquery.colorhelpers.js [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/licenses/nodejs- flot(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/lib/node_modules/flot(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/share/doc/nodejs-flot(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No) [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 51200 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]: 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]: 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: [-]: 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]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: 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. [?]: %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]: 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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.10 starting (python version = 3.4.2)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled ccache Mock Version: 1.2.10 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.10 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/gil/1246721-nodejs-flot/results/nodejs-flot-0.8.3-2.fc23.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/root/ --releasever 23 install /home/gil/1246721-nodejs-flot/results/nodejs-flot-0.8.3-2.fc23.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: nodejs-flot-0.8.3-2.fc23.noarch.rpm nodejs-flot-0.8.3-2.fc23.src.rpm nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javascript -> JavaScript, Java script, Java-script nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US www -> WWW, wow nodejs-flot.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US flotcharts -> flowcharts, flowchart nodejs-flot.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-flot.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/flot/jquery.js /usr/share/javascript/jquery/1/jquery.js nodejs-flot.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/flot/excanvas.js /usr/share/javascript/excanvas/0/excanvas.js nodejs-flot.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/flot/excanvas.min.js /usr/share/javascript/excanvas/0/excanvas.min.js nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javascript -> JavaScript, Java script, Java-script nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jQuery -> j Query, query, equerry nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US www -> WWW, wow nodejs-flot.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US flotcharts -> flowcharts, flowchart nodejs-flot.src:36: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 36, tab: line 4) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 17 warnings. Requires -------- nodejs-flot (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): js-excanvas js-jquery1 nodejs(engine) Provides -------- nodejs-flot: nodejs-flot npm(Flot) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/flot/flot/archive/v0.8.3/nodejs-flot-0.8.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3a3666d0aab777b8fbfddd45146966297e6ef18777d9fd535353be1cc62b21f1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3a3666d0aab777b8fbfddd45146966297e6ef18777d9fd535353be1cc62b21f1 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -b 1246721 -m fedora-rawhide-i386 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 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
NON blocking issues: [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1246721-nodejs- flot/licensecheck.txt Please, report the problem to upstream, for add license header Unknown or generated -------------------- flot-0.8.3/jquery.colorhelpers.js approved
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines ===== 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". 30 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1246724 -nodejs-js-beautify/licensecheck.txt Please, report the problem to upstream, for add license header Unknown or generated -------------------- js-beautify-1.5.10/js/index.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/javascriptobfuscator_unpacker.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/myobfuscate_unpacker.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/p_a_c_k_e_r_unpacker.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/urlencode_unpacker.js [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/node_modules/js- beautify/lib/unpackers(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/share/doc/nodejs-js-beautify(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/lib/node_modules/js-beautify(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/lib/node_modules/js-beautify/node_modules(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/lib/node_modules/js- beautify/lib(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No), /usr/share/licenses/nodejs-js-beautify(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No) [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]: 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]: 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]: 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: [-]: 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]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: 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. [?]: %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]: 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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.10 starting (python version = 3.4.2)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled ccache Mock Version: 1.2.10 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.10 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/gil/1246724-nodejs-js-beautify/results/nodejs-js-beautify-1.5.10-2.fc23.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/root/ --releasever 23 install /home/gil/1246724-nodejs-js-beautify/results/nodejs-js-beautify-1.5.10-2.fc23.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: nodejs-js-beautify-1.5.10-2.fc23.noarch.rpm nodejs-js-beautify-1.5.10-2.fc23.src.rpm nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jsbeautifier -> beautifier nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C jsbeautifier.org for node nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US reindent -> reinvent, re indent, re-indent nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bookmarklets -> bookmark lets, bookmark-lets, booklets nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US deobfuscate -> obfuscate nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US javascriptobfuscator -> JavaScript nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/js-beautify/node_modules/config-chain /usr/lib/node_modules/config-chain nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/js-beautify/node_modules/mkdirp /usr/lib/node_modules/mkdirp nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/js-beautify/node_modules/nopt /usr/lib/node_modules/nopt nodejs-js-beautify.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary js-beautify nodejs-js-beautify.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jsbeautifier -> beautifier nodejs-js-beautify.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C jsbeautifier.org for node nodejs-js-beautify.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US reindent -> reinvent, re indent, re-indent nodejs-js-beautify.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bookmarklets -> bookmark lets, bookmark-lets, booklets nodejs-js-beautify.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US deobfuscate -> obfuscate nodejs-js-beautify.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US javascriptobfuscator -> JavaScript 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 17 warnings. Requires -------- nodejs-js-beautify (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/env nodejs(engine) npm(config-chain) npm(mkdirp) npm(nopt) Provides -------- nodejs-js-beautify: nodejs-js-beautify npm(js-beautify) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/beautify-web/js-beautify/archive/v1.5.10/nodejs-js-beautify-1.5.10.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 055ce354da5f38387020d87ec68bd926af43eb36766b560f721b39fc3617c86a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 055ce354da5f38387020d87ec68bd926af43eb36766b560f721b39fc3617c86a Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -b 1246724 -m fedora-rawhide-i386 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 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
NON blocking issues: [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". 30 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1246724 -nodejs-js-beautify/licensecheck.txt Please, report the problem to upstream, for add license header Unknown or generated -------------------- js-beautify-1.5.10/js/index.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/javascriptobfuscator_unpacker.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/myobfuscate_unpacker.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/p_a_c_k_e_r_unpacker.js js-beautify-1.5.10/js/lib/unpackers/urlencode_unpacker.js approved
sorry for the noise
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: nodejs-flot Short Description: Javascript plotting library for JQuery Upstream URL: http://www.flotcharts.org/ Owners: mayorga williamjmorenor Branches: f23 InitialCC:
Rathann, could you please push an update for nodejs-mkdirp so that we can import this package?
Git done (by process-git-requests).
(In reply to Eduardo Mayorga from comment #17) > Rathann, could you please push an update for nodejs-mkdirp so that we can > import this package? Why would I do that? I'm not the maintainer of that package.
(In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #19) > (In reply to Eduardo Mayorga from comment #17) > > Rathann, could you please push an update for nodejs-mkdirp so that we can > > import this package? > > Why would I do that? I'm not the maintainer of that package. I thought you could do that as a provenpackager. Anyway, I used a fixdep approach to solve the dependencies issues.