Spec URL: http://odysseus.x-tnd.be/fedora/php-rlanvin-rrule/php-rlanvin-rrule.spec SRPM URL: http://odysseus.x-tnd.be/fedora/php-rlanvin-rrule/php-rlanvin-rrule-2.2.0-1.fc30.trashy.src.rpm Description: Lightweight and fast implementation of recurrence rules for PHP (RRULE from RFC 5545), to easily calculate recurring/repeating dates and events (such as in a calendar). This library started as a port of python-dateutil. Autoloader: /usr/share/php/rlanvin/RRule/autoload.php Fedora Account System Username: trasher
Note: this package will be needed for the 9.5 release of GLPI (new calendar features).
From phpcompatinfo report BuildRequires (src + tests) Extensions Analysis Extension Matches REF EXT min/Max PHP min/Max PHP all Core Core 5.3.0 5.3.0 Reflection Reflection 5.0.0 5.0.0 SimpleXML SimpleXML 5.0.0 5.0.0 date date 5.2.0 5.2.0 filter filter 0.11.0 5.0.0 C intl user 1.0.0beta 5.2.0 json json 5.2.0 5.2.0 pcre pcre 4.0.0 4.0.0 spl spl 5.3.0 5.3.0 standard standard 5.1.0 5.1.0 Total [10] 5.3.0 Requires (src only) Extension Matches REF EXT min/Max PHP min/Max PHP all Core Core 5.3.0 5.3.0 date date 5.2.0 5.2.0 filter filter 0.11.0 5.0.0 C intl user 1.0.0beta 5.2.0 pcre pcre 4.0.0 4.0.0 spl spl 5.3.0 5.3.0 standard standard 5.1.0 5.1.0 Total [7] 5.3.0 IMHO: Requires: php-date, php-filter, php-pcre, php-spl Recommends: php-intl
From composer.json "phpunit/phpunit": "^4.8|^5.5|^6.5", So please use more recent version 6.5
Updated: Spec URL: http://odysseus.x-tnd.be/fedora/php-rlanvin-rrule/php-rlanvin-rrule.spec SRPM URL: http://odysseus.x-tnd.be/fedora/php-rlanvin-rrule/php-rlanvin-rrule-2.2.0-2.fc30.trashy.src.rpm
Package 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. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License", "Expat License". 15 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/php- rlanvin-rrule/review-php-rlanvin-rrule/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 20480 bytes in 3 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: 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: [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: php-rlanvin-rrule-2.2.0-2.fc32.noarch.rpm php-rlanvin-rrule-2.2.0-2.fc32.src.rpm php-rlanvin-rrule.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dateutil -> mutilate php-rlanvin-rrule.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Autoloader -> Auto loader, Auto-loader, Freeloader php-rlanvin-rrule.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autoload -> auto load, auto-load, tautology php-rlanvin-rrule.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dateutil -> mutilate php-rlanvin-rrule.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Autoloader -> Auto loader, Auto-loader, Freeloader php-rlanvin-rrule.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US usr -> use, us, user php-rlanvin-rrule.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autoload -> auto load, auto-load, tautology 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
Hi Robert-André, thank you for the review, and sorry I did not find time to work on this again earlier... I've tried to add the package with pkgdb command, but it responds "Could not execute request_repo: The Bugzilla bug's review was approved over 60 days ago" (I did not know that limit). I've unset the review flag, could you please set it again, I hope it will solve the issue. Thank you :)
I'm not going to continue work on this package