https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1697631 --- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> --- A couple of issues: - snapshot info must be included in release - not sure about build flags being used in the compile step - does -devel not need to require the base package in golang? Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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", "Expat License". 14 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/asinha/dump/fedora- reviews/1697631-golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gocode/src, /usr/share/gocode [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [?]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. ^ I'm not sure about this. Are there guidelines on what compilation flags must be used for Golang packages? [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [?]: Changelog in prescribed format. ^ Release should match changelog [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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 10240 bytes in 1 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]: 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 %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [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]: 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]: 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 ===== 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 xde- crypt , golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel , golang-github- xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource ^ Do devel packages in golang not need to require the base package? [?]: Package functions as described. ^ Please check [?]: Latest version is packaged. The 0.0.2 tag refers to this commit: 0d6dc8c093c1c191f00effdfc3b2f858973f0271 So, this is a post-release snapshot? The releas must include the snapshot info (already pointed out above) [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]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [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]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: xde-crypt-0.0.2-1.20190314gitb2862e3.fc31.x86_64.rpm golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel-0.0.2-1.20190314gitb2862e3.fc31.noarch.rpm golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource-0.0.2-1.20190314gitb2862e3.fc31.x86_64.rpm golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-0.0.2-1.20190314gitb2862e3.fc31.src.rpm xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) etcd -> etc, etch, etc d xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US etcd -> etc, etch, etc d xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xordataexchange -> nonexchangeable xde-crypt.x86_64: W: no-documentation xde-crypt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xde-crypt golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/.goipath golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C This package provides debug sources for package golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt. golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) etcd -> etc, etch, etc d golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US etcd -> etc, etch, etc d 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 14 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/xordataexchange/crypt <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/.goipath golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C This package provides debug sources for package golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt. golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/xordataexchange/crypt <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) etcd -> etc, etch, etc d xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US configs -> con figs, con-figs, configure xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US etcd -> etc, etch, etc d xde-crypt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xordataexchange -> nonexchangeable xde-crypt.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/xordataexchange/crypt <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> xde-crypt.x86_64: W: no-documentation xde-crypt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xde-crypt 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 13 warnings. Requires -------- golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): golang(github.com/armon/consul-api) golang(github.com/coreos/etcd/client) golang(golang.org/x/crypto/openpgp) golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): xde-crypt (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel: golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend)(commit=b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend/consul) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend/consul)(commit=b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend/etcd) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend/etcd)(commit=b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend/mock) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/backend/mock)(commit=b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/config) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/config)(commit=b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/encoding/secconf) golang(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/encoding/secconf)(commit=b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218) golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-devel golang-ipath(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt) golang-ipath(github.com/xordataexchange/crypt)(commit=b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218) golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource: golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource golang-github-xordataexchange-crypt-debugsource(x86-64) xde-crypt: xde-crypt xde-crypt(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/xordataexchange/crypt/archive/b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218/crypt-b2862e3d0a775f18c7cfe02273500ae307b61218.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0a77ee274ae3bf264616ae99fc5bfeb47c89e74e2e2febdd5fcb61d9608a5180 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0a77ee274ae3bf264616ae99fc5bfeb47c89e74e2e2febdd5fcb61d9608a5180 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1697631 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
