Bug 2176170 - Review Request: R-docopt - Command-Line Interface Specification Language
Summary: Review Request: R-docopt - Command-Line Interface Specification Language
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Iñaki Ucar
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=%{...
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 2176171
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-03-07 14:52 UTC by Tom "spot" Callaway
Modified: 2023-03-25 00:16 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-03-24 01:41:07 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
i.ucar86: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Tom "spot" Callaway 2023-03-07 14:52:54 UTC
Spec URL: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/R-docopt.spec
SRPM URL: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/R-docopt-0.7.1-1.fc37.src.rpm
Description: Define a command-line interface by just giving it a description in the specific format.
Fedora Account System Username: spot
Koji Rawhide Scratch Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=98404522

Comment 1 Jakub Kadlčík 2023-03-07 15:01:35 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5603118
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2176170-R-docopt/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05603118-R-docopt/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 2 Iñaki Ucar 2023-03-08 09:54:29 UTC
All ok (copying the review below for reference). Package approved.
Just please use the URL field as specified in the package guidelines upon package import:

URL:              https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=%{packname}
Source:           %{url}&version=%{packver}#/%{packname}_%{packver}.tar.gz


Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- Package have the default element marked as %%doc :DESCRIPTION, NEWS
- Package requires R-core.


===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
     Note: Using prebuilt packages
[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: "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown or generated", "MIT
     License". 24 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-
     rpmbuild/results/R-docopt/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.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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 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]: 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

R:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires.
[x]: The package has the standard %install section.

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

Generic:
[!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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.
[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]: 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.

R:
[x]: The %check macro is present
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
     Note: Latest upstream version is 0.7.1, packaged version is 0.7.1

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

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: R-docopt-0.7.1-1.fc39.noarch.rpm
          R-docopt-0.7.1-1.fc39.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/tmpo3s_3un4')]
checks: 31, packages: 2

R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/sub-Tokens-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/+5B+2CTokens-method.html
R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/subset-Tokens-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/+5B+3C-+2CTokens-method.html
R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character-Pattern-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character+2CPattern-method.html
R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character-Tokens-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character+2CTokens-method.html
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 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

R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/sub-Tokens-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/+5B+2CTokens-method.html
R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/subset-Tokens-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/+5B+3C-+2CTokens-method.html
R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character-Pattern-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character+2CPattern-method.html
R-docopt.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character-Tokens-method.html /usr/share/R/library/docopt/help/as.character+2CTokens-method.html
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/docopt_0.7.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 9f473887e4607e9b21fd4ab02e802858d0ac2ca6dad9e357a9d884a47fe4b0ff
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 9f473887e4607e9b21fd4ab02e802858d0ac2ca6dad9e357a9d884a47fe4b0ff


Requires
--------
R-docopt (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    R(ABI)
    R(methods)
    R-core



Provides
--------
R-docopt:
    R(docopt)
    R-docopt



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name R-docopt --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, R, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, Ocaml, Perl, Python, C/C++, Haskell, Java, fonts, SugarActivity
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 3 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2023-03-15 15:02:55 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-docopt

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2023-03-15 15:49:05 UTC
FEDORA-2023-4d551e14ba has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-4d551e14ba

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2023-03-15 15:49:05 UTC
FEDORA-2023-aca2f58e38 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-aca2f58e38

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2023-03-15 15:49:05 UTC
FEDORA-2023-5280183775 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-5280183775

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2023-03-16 18:39:31 UTC
FEDORA-2023-aca2f58e38 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-2023-aca2f58e38 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-aca2f58e38

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2023-03-16 19:29:05 UTC
FEDORA-2023-5280183775 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-2023-5280183775 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-5280183775

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2023-03-17 04:04:38 UTC
FEDORA-2023-4d551e14ba has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-4d551e14ba

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2023-03-24 01:41:07 UTC
FEDORA-2023-aca2f58e38 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2023-03-24 01:54:39 UTC
FEDORA-2023-5280183775 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2023-03-25 00:16:26 UTC
FEDORA-2023-4d551e14ba has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, 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.