https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234605 Ralph Bean <rbean@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Ralph Bean <rbean@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Ratnadeep, this looks good but I found four areas here that need work before this can pass review: [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. You should include the COPYING.LESSER file in the %files section also. Also, there is a %license macro that can be used instead of %doc for license files. That is nice to have as it marks up exactly what and what is not a legal doc for automated checks of the whole distro later on. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text [!]: Three files/dirs problems I noticed: - statscache-common should probably own the directory %{python_sitelib}/%{modname}/ - statscache-web should probably own the directory %{_datadir}/%{modname}/ - Lastly, I don't think %{_sysconfdir}/fedmsg.d/ should be declared in the '%files common' section. The core fedmsg package already owns that directory. [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in statscache-common , statscache-web , statscache-consumer The gist here is that the statscache-web and statscache-consumer packages should declare a requirement on the statscache-common package (so that it gets pulled in automatically on install). A line like this: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in each sub-package should do it. [!]: The statscache-consumer package should Require fedmsg-hub. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 8 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/threebean/1234605-statscache/licensecheck.txt [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/statscache, /usr/share/statscache [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python2.7/site- packages/statscache, /usr/share/statscache [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /etc/fedmsg.d(fedmsg) [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [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. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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). [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: No %config files under /usr. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [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 %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in statscache-common , statscache-web , statscache-consumer [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: 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 architectures. [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 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: statscache-common-0.0.1-1.fc20.noarch.rpm statscache-web-0.0.1-1.fc20.noarch.rpm statscache-consumer-0.0.1-1.fc20.noarch.rpm statscache-0.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm statscache-web.noarch: W: no-documentation statscache-consumer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fedmsg -> Feds statscache-consumer.noarch: W: no-documentation statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US https -> HTTP statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, GitHub statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontend -> fronted, front end, front-end statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datagrepper -> daguerreotype statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US csv -> cs, cs v, CST statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US json -> son, j son statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -> HTML, ht ml, ht-ml statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US svg -> avg, sag, VG statscache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontends -> front ends, front-ends, fronds 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- statscache-consumer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fedmsg -> feeding statscache-consumer.noarch: W: no-documentation statscache-web.noarch: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Requires -------- statscache-consumer (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) statscache-common statscache-common (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): config(statscache-common) python(abi) statscache-web (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python-flask statscache-common Provides -------- statscache-consumer: statscache-consumer statscache-common: config(statscache-common) statscache-common statscache-web: statscache-web Source checksums ---------------- https://rtnpro.fedorapeople.org/statscache-0.0.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 7e3a080f2c1be68ddc4c8cda8582d7eda4c2dc4ab02a6007e4d210dc2babd1b1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 7e3a080f2c1be68ddc4c8cda8582d7eda4c2dc4ab02a6007e4d210dc2babd1b1 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1234605 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review