Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing/crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing/crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing-2.0-1.fc38.src.rpm Description: This repo contains Dutch puzzle set downloaders for GNOME Crosswords. The puzzles are pulled from web.keesing.com and converted to ipuz format supported by Crosswords. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=93476097
Looks fine, APPROVED. There are some nits: - please file an issue (or a PR) to include license text and link it in the spec - please update to 3.0 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 %license. [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". 56 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/2138054-crosswords-puzzle-sets- keesing/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 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: No rpmlint messages. [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]: 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. [!]: 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. [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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing-2.0-1.fc38.noarch.rpm crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing-2.0-1.fc38.src.rpm =========================================================================== rpmlint session starts ========================================================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp63d65ce2')] checks: 31, packages: 2 ============================================ 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.8 s =========================================== Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://gitlab.gnome.org/philip.goto/puzzle-sets-keesing/-/archive/2.0/puzzle-sets-keesing-2.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 60c5f35f80caedf7539361d39186021e5302047568e6f647f053599bfa815134 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 60c5f35f80caedf7539361d39186021e5302047568e6f647f053599bfa815134 Requires -------- crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 crosswords python3 python3dist(python-dateutil) python3dist(requests) python3dist(xmltodict) Provides -------- crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing: crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing metainfo() metainfo(org.gnome.Crosswords.PuzzleSets.keesing.metainfo.xml) Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2138054 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: R, fonts, C/C++, Perl, Haskell, PHP, SugarActivity, Python, Ocaml, Java Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/crosswords-puzzle-sets-keesing
FEDORA-2022-adf0be438d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-adf0be438d
FEDORA-2022-adf0be438d has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2022-957bc931f4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-957bc931f4
FEDORA-2022-a86f40966c has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a86f40966c
FEDORA-2022-957bc931f4 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-957bc931f4 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-957bc931f4 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2022-a86f40966c has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-a86f40966c \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a86f40966c See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2022-957bc931f4 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2022-a86f40966c has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.