Bug 958129 - Review Request: php-pecl-redis - Extension for communicating with the Redis key-value store
Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-redis - Extension for communicating with the Redis k...
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Haïkel Guémar
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2013-04-30 13:03 UTC by Remi Collet
Modified: 2013-07-04 20:00 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.el6
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2013-06-27 02:08:45 UTC
Type: ---
karlthered: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Remi Collet 2013-04-30 13:03:42 UTC
Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/remicollet/remirepo/7ed0a17e1bc06c4006cb05d3dd80735392f7107b/php/pecl/php-pecl-redis/php-pecl-redis.spec
SRPM URL: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/SRPMS/php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.remi.src.rpm
The phpredis extension provides an API for communicating
with the Redis key-value store.

This Redis client implements most of the latest Redis API.
As method only only works when also implemented on the server side,
some doesn't work with an old redis server version.

Fedora Account System Username: remi

NOTE : this is a rename of php-redis to php-pecl-redis as this extension is now part of pecl forge.

Comment 1 Haïkel Guémar 2013-06-17 05:18:33 UTC
Package Review

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

- Package requires php-common instead of php.
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PHP

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

[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
     Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
     attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "PHP (v3.01)", "Unknown or generated". 30 files have unknown license.
     Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/haikel/958129-php-pecl-
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
[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.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
     Note: Documentation size is 102400 bytes in 4 files.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[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 %doc.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
     supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).

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

[x]: 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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.

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

[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

Checking: php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
php-pecl-redis.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US phpredis -> predispose
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
# rpmlint php-pecl-redis
php-pecl-redis.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US phpredis -> predispose
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'

php-pecl-redis (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):


Unversioned so-files
php-pecl-redis: /usr/lib64/php-zts/modules/redis.so
php-pecl-redis: /usr/lib64/php/modules/redis.so

Source checksums
http://pecl.php.net/get/redis-2.2.3.tgz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 87861198403ef7bf09306494f2efc5b55bfdcc6095b7aac059a546a2e662967d
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 87861198403ef7bf09306494f2efc5b55bfdcc6095b7aac059a546a2e662967d
https://github.com/nicolasff/phpredis/archive/2.2.3.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 53216ff9571d9e259de52c15bcde5db315e74374ab05f120545c68b5d87a9bd0
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 53216ff9571d9e259de52c15bcde5db315e74374ab05f120545c68b5d87a9bd0

Generated by fedora-review 0.4.1 (b2e211f) last change: 2013-04-29
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 958129 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64

Comment 2 Haïkel Guémar 2013-06-17 05:26:08 UTC
The spec is perfectly in phase with general and PHP specific guidelines, the upgrade path is handled correctly from php-redis.
I wrote a small script connecting to redis and doing naughty stuff to some data, it worked fine too and pretty much the same.
I also checked the C code, nothing suspicious.

Damn, I hereby approve the rename.

Comment 3 Remi Collet 2013-06-17 06:27:05 UTC
Thanks for the review

New Package SCM Request
Package Name: php-pecl-redis
Short Description: Extension for communicating with the Redis key-value store
Owners: remi
Branches: f18 f19 el6

Comment 4 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-06-17 12:25:19 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2013-06-17 16:43:54 UTC
php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2013-06-17 16:44:07 UTC
php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2013-06-17 16:44:19 UTC
php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2013-06-17 19:08:10 UTC
php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2013-06-27 02:08:45 UTC
php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2013-06-29 18:49:53 UTC
php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2013-07-04 20:00:03 UTC
php-pecl-redis-2.2.3-1.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.