https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Bug ID: 1271802 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-boolbase - Two functions: One that returns true, one that returns false Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jsmith.fedora@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-boolbase/nodejs-boolbase.sp... SRPM URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-boolbase/nodejs-boolbase-1.... Description: Two functions: One that returns true, one that returns false Fedora Account System Username: jsmith
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Jared Smith jsmith.fedora@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |956806 (nodejs-reviews), | |1269538 (IoT)
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806 [Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269538 [Bug 1269538] Tracker for IoT on Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Jared Smith jsmith.fedora@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1271795
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271795 [Bug 1271795] Review Request: nodejs-css-select - A CSS selector compiler/engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1274738
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1274738 [Bug 1274738] Review Request: nodejs-nth-check - A performant nth-check parser & compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |tom@compton.nu Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |tom@compton.nu Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- 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. [-]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/tom/1271802-nodejs- boolbase/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [!]: 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). [?]: 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. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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]: 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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-1.fc24.src.rpm nodejs-boolbase.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory nodejs-boolbase.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Requires -------- nodejs-boolbase (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs nodejs(engine)
Provides -------- nodejs-boolbase: nodejs-boolbase npm(boolbase)
Source checksums ---------------- https://registry.npmjs.org/boolbase/-/boolbase-1.0.0.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 69628ff8092c5ff940ea4a0f29da98d520615bae138755c9e059033606c6caa8 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 69628ff8092c5ff940ea4a0f29da98d520615bae138755c9e059033606c6caa8
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m compton-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1271802 Buildroot used: compton-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #2 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- License text is not included, so you need to prod upstream and add it locally until they provide it.
There are some tests on github, but it's so simple that I guess it may not be worth the trouble...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #3 from Jared Smith jsmith.fedora@gmail.com --- Thanks for the feedback. Updated to include the license text (upstream added it to the github repo after the last NPM tarball release) and the simplistic tests.
Spec URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-boolbase/nodejs-boolbase.sp... SRPM URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-boolbase/nodejs-boolbase-1....
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #4 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- The tests are being included in the built package but other than that it looks good.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #5 from Jared Smith jsmith.fedora@gmail.com --- Updated to remove tests from installed files:
Spec URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-boolbase/nodejs-boolbase.sp... SRPM URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-boolbase/nodejs-boolbase-1....
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- Looks good. Package approved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/nodejs-boolbase
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-ecad1e6665
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-a849a794ac
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-01fbd49f37
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update nodejs-boolbase' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-ecad1e6665
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'yum --enablerepo=epel-testing update nodejs-boolbase' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-01fbd49f37
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'yum --enablerepo=epel-testing update nodejs-boolbase' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-a849a794ac
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2015-12-04 14:20:46
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-boolbase-1.0.0-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1387531 (Node-RED)
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387531 [Bug 1387531] Package tracker for supporting Node-RED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271802
Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|1269538 (IoT) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269538 [Bug 1269538] Tracker for IoT on Fedora
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org