Bug 1365589 - Review Request: rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml - XML serialization for Active Model objects and Active Record models
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml - XML serialization for A...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jun Aruga
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1365588 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-08-09 15:35 UTC by Vít Ondruch
Modified: 2016-08-27 10:42 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-08-27 10:42:48 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
jaruga: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 1 Vít Ondruch 2016-08-09 15:37:28 UTC
*** Bug 1365588 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Jun Aruga 2016-08-09 15:55:14 UTC
I will review this!

Comment 3 Jun Aruga 2016-08-09 16:49:26 UTC
I reviewed it.
It looks no problem. I APPROVED.



# Detail (The result of fedora-review)

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". 9 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jaruga/git
     /fedora-packages/review/1365589-rubygem-activemodel-serializers-
     xml/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gems,
     /usr/share/gems/doc
[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.
[x]: 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.
[x]: 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: 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 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]: 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

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[x]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
     Note: Package contains font files
[x]: 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.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in rubygem-
     activemodel-serializers-xml-doc
[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.
[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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[!]: When checking ruby code, install the ruby plugin.
[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: rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
          rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-doc-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
          rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-1.0.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml.noarch: W: no-documentation
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml.src: W: invalid-url Source1: activemodel-serialization-xml-1.0.1-tests.tgz
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://github.com/rails/activemodel-serializers-xml <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml.noarch: W: no-documentation
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-doc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://github.com/rails/activemodel-serializers-xml <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.



Requires
--------
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ruby(rubygems)
    rubygem(activemodel)
    rubygem(activerecord)
    rubygem(activesupport)
    rubygem(builder)

rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml



Provides
--------
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml:
    rubygem(activemodel-serializers-xml)
    rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml

rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-doc:
    rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-doc



Source checksums
----------------
https://rubygems.org/gems/activemodel-serializers-xml-1.0.1.gem :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : dc4c06b1ac9d819698289d490ffd0c7386bce8f86b59237a5f1ffc35f8b4f73e
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : dc4c06b1ac9d819698289d490ffd0c7386bce8f86b59237a5f1ffc35f8b4f73e


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1365589
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Comment 4 Gwyn Ciesla 2016-08-10 13:09:21 UTC
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2016-08-11 05:38:54 UTC
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-1.0.1-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b25c330fbe

Comment 6 Vít Ondruch 2016-08-11 05:44:26 UTC
Thx for a review and processing the package.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2016-08-11 16:56:43 UTC
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-1.0.1-1.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-2016-b25c330fbe

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2016-08-27 10:42:46 UTC
rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml-1.0.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.