Bug 790667 - Review Request: msgpack - Binary-based efficient object serialization library
Summary: Review Request: msgpack - Binary-based efficient object serialization library
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robin Lee
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-02-15 06:33 UTC by Daiki Ueno
Modified: 2013-05-07 18:10 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-06-18 01:30:06 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
robinlee.sysu: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Daiki Ueno 2012-02-15 06:33:08 UTC
Spec URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/msgpack/msgpack.spec
SRPM URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/msgpack/msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc18.src.rpm
Description:
MessagePack is a binary-based efficient object serialization
library. It enables to exchange structured objects between many
languages like JSON. But unlike JSON, it is very fast and small.

Comment 1 Robin Lee 2012-06-15 07:31:36 UTC
Package Review
==============

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



==== C/C++ ====
[x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: MUST ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if
     present.


==== 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 primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
     that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
     Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
     Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
     Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[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 Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
     Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: 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 License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate 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 msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc18.i686.rpm

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


rpmlint msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc18.src.rpm

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


rpmlint msgpack-debuginfo-0.5.7-1.fc18.i686.rpm

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


rpmlint msgpack-devel-0.5.7-1.fc18.i686.rpm

msgpack-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.


[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
/home/cheese/Downloads/790667/msgpack-0.5.7.tar.gz :
  MD5SUM this package     : 705106a9378c792fe22d285dba5c142c
  MD5SUM upstream package : 705106a9378c792fe22d285dba5c142c

[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.
[x]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: 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 Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
     upstream.
[!]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
     Note: Patch0: msgpack-gtest-implicit-dso.patch (msgpack-gtest-implicit-
     dso.patch)
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: 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.
[x]: 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.


Generated by fedora-review 0.1.3
External plugins:

Issues:
[!]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
     Note: Patch0: msgpack-gtest-implicit-dso.patch (msgpack-gtest-implicit-
     dso.patch)



Issues are not blocking. Approved.

Comment 2 Daiki Ueno 2012-06-15 07:50:19 UTC
Thanks for the review, Robin.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: msgpack
Short Description: Binary-based efficient object serialization library
Owners: ueno
Branches: f17 f16 f15
InitialCC:

Comment 3 Gwyn Ciesla 2012-06-15 13:05:43 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

FYI, f15 is EOL in not too long.

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2012-06-18 01:29:07 UTC
msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc17

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2012-06-18 01:29:19 UTC
msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc16

Comment 6 Daiki Ueno 2012-06-18 01:30:06 UTC
Thanks; pushed them only to F16 or later.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2012-06-28 03:23:00 UTC
msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2012-06-28 03:52:42 UTC
msgpack-0.5.7-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.

Comment 9 Remi Collet 2013-04-02 15:28:08 UTC
Can you please consider pushing this package in EPEL-6 ?

If you don't want to maintain it in EPEL-6, please open the SCN request for new branch and set me as the owner.

I need it to build php-pecl-msgpack

Comment 10 Daiki Ueno 2013-04-03 00:23:03 UTC
Sure.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: msgpack
New Branches: el6
Owners: ueno
InitialCC:

Comment 11 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-04-03 11:52:14 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2013-04-18 07:45:17 UTC
msgpack-0.5.7-4.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/msgpack-0.5.7-4.el6

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2013-05-07 18:10:34 UTC
msgpack-0.5.7-4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.


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