Spec URL: https://tomh.fedorapeople.org//nodejs-pg-numeric.spec SRPM URL: https://tomh.fedorapeople.org//nodejs-pg-numeric-1.0.2-1.fc31.src.rpm Description: A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a string.
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=39105170
This is informal review only. Feedback appreciated. Don't use %{summary} macro in %description. Description should expand on summary and describe package more in depth than summary. 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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/node_modules/pg- numeric(locale,, defaulting, C, to, Failed, set), /usr/share/doc/nodejs-pg-numeric(locale,, defaulting, C, to, Failed, set), /usr/share/licenses/nodejs-pg-numeric(locale,, defaulting, C, to, Failed, set) [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. [?]: 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. [x]: 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]: 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 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages. [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]: %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]: 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-pg-numeric-1.0.2-1.fc32.noarch.rpm nodejs-pg-numeric-1.0.2-1.fc32.src.rpm nodejs-pg-numeric.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a string. nodejs-pg-numeric.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-pg-numeric.src: E: description-line-too-long C A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a string. 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "cs_CZ.UTF-8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "cs_CZ.UTF-8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). nodejs-pg-numeric.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a string. nodejs-pg-numeric.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://www.npmjs.com/package/pg-numeric <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> nodejs-pg-numeric.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/charmander/pg-numeric/archive/v1.0.2/nodejs-pg-numeric-1.0.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 73a54642dd763921fec818bd0e7e4b2f8276dc6e4e4bed192c0243f0858fc519 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 73a54642dd763921fec818bd0e7e4b2f8276dc6e4e4bed192c0243f0858fc519 Requires -------- nodejs-pg-numeric (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs(engine) Provides -------- nodejs-pg-numeric: nodejs-pg-numeric npm(pg-numeric) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.3 (44b83c7) last change: 2019-09-18 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -u https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774194 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-{{ target_arch }} Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Perl, fonts, Java, SugarActivity, Ocaml, C/C++, Python, R, Haskell, PHP Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Sad as it is using summary like that is quite common for Node.js packages because that is often all the description there is upstream (see https://www.npmjs.com/package/pg-numeric in this case) which probably in turn relates to the packages often being very small or being largely intended as internal subcomponents of some larger library.
I see. As this is the case, I think using %{summary} is ok for this package.
- License ok - Latest version packaged - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors - Conforms to Packaging Guidelines Package approved.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-pg-numeric
(In reply to Ondřej Pohořelský from comment #4) > I see. As this is the case, I think using %{summary} is ok for this package. Are you trying to get sponsored? I can't find a Package Review opened by you.
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #7) > (In reply to Ondřej Pohořelský from comment #4) > > I see. As this is the case, I think using %{summary} is ok for this package. > > Are you trying to get sponsored? I can't find a Package Review opened by you. Yes, Ondřej is working with me on his sponsoring. No package review was submitted yet. Not sure if there will be any in near term. But Ondřej will be involved in maintenance of SCM packages, so he has good mentors :)