Bug 640740 - Review Request: ckeditor - WYSIWYG text editor to be used inside web pages
Summary: Review Request: ckeditor - WYSIWYG text editor to be used inside web pages
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mario Santagiuliana
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 640742
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-10-06 18:16 UTC by Orion Poplawski
Modified: 2012-01-23 20:55 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-01-23 20:55:18 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
fedora: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Orion Poplawski 2010-10-06 18:16:48 UTC
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ckeditor.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ckeditor-3.4.1-1.fc13.src.rpm
Description:
CKEditor is a text editor to be used inside web pages. It's a WYSIWYG editor,
which means that the text being edited on it looks as similar as possible to
the results users have when publishing it. It brings to the web common editing
features found on desktop editing applications like Microsoft Word and
OpenOffice.

Comment 1 Orion Poplawski 2011-08-03 18:19:31 UTC
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ckeditor-3.6.1-1.fc15.src.rpm

* Wed Aug 3 2011 Orion Poplawski <orion.com> 3.6.1-1
- Update to 3.6.1

Comment 2 Orion Poplawski 2011-10-25 21:57:22 UTC
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ckeditor.spec
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ckeditor-3.6.2-1.fc16.src.rpm

* Tue Oct 25 2011 Orion Poplawski <orion.com> 3.6.2-1
- Update to 3.6.2

Comment 3 Mario Santagiuliana 2012-01-22 17:00:30 UTC
Can I help in the review process?

Comment 4 Orion Poplawski 2012-01-22 18:49:44 UTC
Sure.  We'll still need a packager to do final approval if you aren't one already.

Comment 5 Mario Santagiuliana 2012-01-22 19:39:06 UTC
Ok I take it. Do you plan to package for EPEL?

Comment 6 Orion Poplawski 2012-01-22 23:37:58 UTC
Yes, EL6

Comment 7 Mario Santagiuliana 2012-01-23 12:34:12 UTC
Package Review
==============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated



==== Generic ====
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
     least one supported architecture.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
     that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[!]: MUST Buildroot is not present
     Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
     Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
     Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging
     for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
     Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[!]: MUST 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 %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST No %config files under /usr.
[x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.

rpmlint ckeditor-3.6.2-1.fc17.src.rpm

1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


rpmlint ckeditor-3.6.2-1.fc17.noarch.rpm

1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


[!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
/home/makerpm/640740/ckeditor_3.6.2.tar.gz :
  MD5SUM this package     : 1c490b050c428e79a1f65ba5459e7ec9
  MD5SUM upstream package : 1c490b050c428e79a1f65ba5459e7ec9
ckeditor.conf :
  MD5SUM this package     : 70859c800a97ae2718430d29a4d9fe67
  MD5SUM upstream package : upstream source not found

[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
     /usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
     --requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
     upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.

Issues:
[!]: MUST Buildroot is not present
     Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
[!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
     Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
[!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
     Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging
     for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
     Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[!]: MUST 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 %doc.
[!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
/home/makerpm/640740/ckeditor_3.6.2.tar.gz :
  MD5SUM this package     : 1c490b050c428e79a1f65ba5459e7ec9
  MD5SUM upstream package : 1c490b050c428e79a1f65ba5459e7ec9
ckeditor.conf :
  MD5SUM this package     : 70859c800a97ae2718430d29a4d9fe67
  MD5SUM upstream package : upstream source not found



Generated by fedora-review 0.1.1

The issues can be ignored because package will be push in EPEL too.
Please, can you expand your %doc macro writing the single name and not using *.html? Then I will approve your package.

Thank you :)

Comment 8 Orion Poplawski 2012-01-23 17:14:51 UTC
Thanks for the review.  What is the issue with using %doc *.html?

Comment 9 Mario Santagiuliana 2012-01-23 17:32:05 UTC
Simple replace %doc *.html with %doc CHANGES.html INSTALL.html LICENSE.html so it is more simple to understand what you are including in documentation and if in future the package contain other html file that are not document we can view that.

Comment 10 Orion Poplawski 2012-01-23 17:40:53 UTC
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ckeditor.spec
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ckeditor-3.6.2-2.fc16.src.rpm

* Mon Jan 23 2012 Orion Poplawski <orion.com> 3.6.2-2
- Make %%doc line explicit

Comment 11 Mario Santagiuliana 2012-01-23 17:51:02 UTC
Wonderful!
Package APPROVED.

Comment 12 Orion Poplawski 2012-01-23 20:21:46 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: ckeditor
Short Description: WYSIWYG text editor to be used inside web pages
Owners: orion
Branches: f16 f15 el6 el5
InitialCC:

Comment 13 Gwyn Ciesla 2012-01-23 20:33:41 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 14 Orion Poplawski 2012-01-23 20:55:18 UTC
Checked in and built.  Thanks all.


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