Bug 688786 - Review Request: perl-NTLM - perl module for NTLM authentication
Summary: Review Request: perl-NTLM - perl module for NTLM authentication
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ruediger Landmann
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-03-18 01:29 UTC by Nick Bebout
Modified: 2011-06-23 22:50 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

(edit)
Clone Of:
(edit)
Last Closed: 2011-06-23 22:50:04 UTC
rlandman: fedora-review+
tibbs: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Nick Bebout 2011-03-18 01:29:46 UTC
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-NTLM.spec
SRPM URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-NTLM-1.05-1.fc15.src.rpm
Koji scratch build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2922330
Description: 

This module provides methods to use NTLM authentication.  It can be used
as an authenticate method with the Mail::IMAPClient module to perform
the challenge/response mechanism for NTLM connections or it can be used
on its own for NTLM authentication with other protocols (eg. HTTP).

Comment 1 Nick Bebout 2011-03-18 01:33:32 UTC
[nb@desktop SPECS]$ rpmlint perl-NTLM.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

[nb@desktop SRPMS]$ rpmlint perl-NTLM-1.05-1.fc15.src.rpm 
perl-NTLM.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US IMAPClient -> Impatient
perl-NTLM.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> eh, e, g
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

[nb@desktop noarch]$ rpmlint perl-NTLM-1.05-1.fc16.noarch.rpm 
perl-NTLM.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US IMAPClient -> Impatient
perl-NTLM.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> eh, e, g
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

The spelling errors are not errors.

Comment 2 Ruediger Landmann 2011-03-18 05:10:34 UTC
General observations:

* use a macro for the version in the SOURCE0 line
* you don't need to explicitly Require perl(Digest::HMAC_MD5)
* please BR: perl(Test::Pod) to enable the test (not a blocker though)
* thanks for working with upstream to get the license clarified. However, we now have a package that's (dual) licensed under the GPL, but does not ship with a copy of the GPL. I'm not sure what needs to happen here, so am requesting guidance from legal list. At the very least, please add the file that contains that email to the %docs line, since it's considered part of the license now.

Also, unless you're planning to build this for EL5, you don't need:
* the BuildRoot: line
* the %clean section
* to clean the buildroot in the %install section.

Otherwise, all good! Hopefully, we'll get something definitive on the license question pretty quickly.

- = N/A
 / = Check
 ! = Problem
 ? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
 [/] Rpmlint output is clean:
$ rpmlint SPECS/perl-NTLM.spec 
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint SRPMS/perl-NTLM-1.05-1.fc14.src.rpm
perl-NTLM.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US IMAPClient -> Clientship, Clientage, Clientele
perl-NTLM.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> Eg, eh, e
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/perl-NTLM-1.05-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
perl-NTLM.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US IMAPClient -> Clientship, Clientage, Clientele
perl-NTLM.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> Eg, eh, e
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

 [/] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
 [/] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
 [/] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Language specific
items
 [/] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [/] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     License type: GPL+ or artistic
 [!] 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.
* see above

 [/] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
 [/] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
$ md5sum SOURCES/NTLM-1.05.tar.gz 
5d148e88d96785d996bdd8e1517b9d8c  SOURCES/NTLM-1.05.tar.gz
$ md5sum ~/Download/NTLM-1.05.tar.gz 
5d148e88d96785d996bdd8e1517b9d8c  /home/rlandmann/Download/NTLM-1.05.tar.gz

 [/] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
     Tested: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2922596
 [/] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
 [/] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
* yes, but see general comments above

 [-] The spec file handles locales properly (with the %find_lang macro)
 [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
 [/] Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
 [/] Package is not relocatable.
 [/] Package must own all directories that it creates.
 [/] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
 [/] Permissions on files are set properly
 [/] %files section includes a %defattr(...) line
 [!] Package consistently uses macros.
* please fix SOURCE0

 [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
 [/] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
 [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
 [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] -devel packages require base package with full versioning.
 [/] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
 [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
 [/] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 [/] Filenames are valid UTF-8

Comment 3 Ruediger Landmann 2011-03-18 06:07:02 UTC
Question on legal list: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-March/001578.html

Comment 5 Ruediger Landmann 2011-03-20 22:48:38 UTC
Thanks Nick -- looks good now. Spot's response on legal list boils down to:

* please ask upstream to include a copy of the GPL in source

* if they don't want to do that, send them a copy of the GPLv1 and ask them if it's OK for you to include that file in the version of the module shipped in Fedora.

* if they don't want to include it themselves and don't want you to include it, refer back to legal-list.

Full text here: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-March/001584.html

Cheers
Rudi

Comment 6 Ruediger Landmann 2011-03-23 05:56:10 UTC
Sorry Nick; I've done a bit more digging and conclude that I've been a bit too paranoid here. 

It turns out, however, that although you don't need to explicitly Require perl(Digest::HMAC_MD5), you *do* need to BR: it. 

If you fix that, I'm happy to approve the package.

Comment 8 Ruediger Landmann 2011-03-24 22:36:22 UTC
OK: all good now. Many thanks, and sorry again for the delay.

ACCEPT

Comment 9 Ruediger Landmann 2011-03-24 23:44:38 UTC
Unblocking FE-Legal -- the way this module is packaged is consistent with common packaging practice

Comment 10 Nick Bebout 2011-03-24 23:46:29 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: perl-NTLM
Short Description: perl module for NTLM authentication
Owners: nb
Branches: f13 f14 f15 el4 el5 el6
InitialCC:

Comment 11 Jason Tibbitts 2011-03-25 19:06:19 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).


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