Bug 750664 - Review Request: drupal7-footnotes - Allows to easily create automatically numbered footnote references
Summary: Review Request: drupal7-footnotes - Allows to easily create automatically num...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Paul W. Frields
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: InsightReviews
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-11-01 22:20 UTC by Peter Borsa
Modified: 2011-12-04 02:26 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.fc16
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-11-16 09:27:57 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
stickster: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Peter Borsa 2011-11-01 22:20:14 UTC
Spec URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-footnotes.spec
SRPM URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm
Description: Footnotes module can be used to easily create automatically numbered footnote references into an article or post (such as a reference to a
URL).


rpmlint output:

$ rpmlint drupal7-footnotes.spec ../SRPMS/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.noarch.rpm 
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

koji output:


Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3479048
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
3479048 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm): free
3479048 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm): free -> open (x86-05.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
  3479049 buildArch (drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-05.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
  3479049 buildArch (drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-05.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  1 open  1 done  0 failed
3479048 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm): open (x86-05.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  0 open  2 done  0 failed

3479048 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm) completed successfully

Comment 1 Peter Borsa 2011-11-03 18:47:40 UTC
Updated files:
http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-footnotes.spec
http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm


$ rpmlint drupal7-footnotes.spec ../SRPMS/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.noarch.rpm 
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3485001
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
3485001 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm): free
3485001 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm): free -> open (x86-10.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
  3485061 buildArch (drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
  3485061 buildArch (drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  1 open  1 done  0 failed
3485001 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm): open (x86-10.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  0 open  2 done  0 failed

3485001 build (dist-f15, drupal7-footnotes-2.5-2.fc15.src.rpm) completed successfully

Comment 2 Paul W. Frields 2011-11-15 19:10:48 UTC
[ O K ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.

[ O K ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.

[ O K ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.

[ O K ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.

[ O K ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines.

[ O K ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. 

*** OK provided bundling is fixed as per below.

[ O K ] 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 must be included in %doc.

[ O K ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. 

[ O K ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. 

[ O K ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.

$ md5sum ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/drupal7-footnotes-2.5/footnotes-7.x-2.5.tar.gz ; curl -s -o - http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/footnotes-7.x-2.5.tar.gz | md5sum -
a7f42d78aae27442d3bf77ae5794c142  /home/pfrields/rpmbuild/SOURCES/drupal7-footnotes-2.5/footnotes-7.x-2.5.tar.gz
a7f42d78aae27442d3bf77ae5794c142  -

[ O K ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one primary architecture. 

[ O K ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line. 

[ O K ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.

[ O K ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.

[ O K ] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. 

[ FIX ] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.

*** Package should remove the footnotes_wysiwyg directory, because the
    TinyMCE editor is bundled there instead of using a system version.
    If you include this in the spec %files area, the License field
    will then also be correct.

    %exclude %{drupaldir}/modules/footnotes/footnotes/footnotes_wysiwyg

[ O K ] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker. 

[ O K ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does
not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which
does create that directory. 

[ O K ] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)

[ O K ] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be
set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include
a %defattr(...) line. 

[ O K ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. 

[ O K ] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. 

[ O K ] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). 

[ O K ] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present. 

[ N/A ] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. 

[ N/A ] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. 

[ N/A ] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package. 

[ N/A ] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the
base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release} 

[ O K ] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.

[ N/A ] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged
GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the
spec file with your explanation. 

[ O K ] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time. 

[ O K ] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

* * *
APPROVED, provided the above change is made to %files to remove the
bundled TinyMCE library.

Comment 3 Peter Borsa 2011-11-15 21:57:58 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: drupal7-footnotes
Short Description: Allows to easily create automatically numbered footnote references
Owners: asrob jsmith pfrields
Branches: f15 f16 el5 el6
InitialCC:

Comment 4 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-11-15 23:18:46 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2011-11-16 08:51:58 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-3.fc15

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2011-11-16 09:04:36 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.fc15

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2011-11-16 09:13:56 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.fc16

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2011-11-16 09:19:41 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.el5

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2011-11-16 09:25:32 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.el6

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2011-12-03 20:55:38 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2011-12-03 20:57:17 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2011-12-04 02:25:56 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2011-12-04 02:26:16 UTC
drupal7-footnotes-2.5-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.


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