Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: waterbearlang-waterbear - Waterbear is a toolkit for making programming more accessible and fun.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
Summary: Review Request: waterbearlang-waterbear - Waterbear is a toolkit for making programming more accessible and fun. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: agreene@learn.senecac.on.ca QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: ---
Spec URL: http://newzealand.proximity.on.ca/waterbear/waterbearlang-waterbear.spec
SRPM URL: http://newzealand.proximity.on.ca/waterbear/waterbearlang-waterbear-1.0-5.fc...
Description:
Waterbear is a toolkit for making programming more accessible and fun. Having a visual language means you don't have to focus on learning a syntax to start programming.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
Andrew Greene agreene@learn.senecac.on.ca changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
--- Comment #1 from Chris Tyler chris@tylers.info 2012-05-04 16:15:54 EDT --- Here's an informal first review...
N MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]
*** Please post rpmlint output.
Y MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . Y MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] . N MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
*** The httpd subpackage does nothing.
Y MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. Y MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [3] NA 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 must be included in %doc.[4] Y MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] Y MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] N MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
*** The Source0: field should point to a reliable upstream URL (such as https://github.com/waterbearlang/waterbear/tarball/d26edaa which corresponds to the git commit d26edaa). *** Additions to the source should be in other files, e.g., Source1: waterbear.desktop
...and at that point in the checklist I stopped. Please address these issues and I'll re-review.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Greene agreene@learn.senecac.on.ca 2012-05-04 16:52:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1)
Here's an informal first review...
N MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]
*** Please post rpmlint output.
Y MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . Y MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] . N MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
*** The httpd subpackage does nothing.
Y MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. Y MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [3] NA 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 must be included in %doc.[4] Y MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] Y MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] N MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
*** The Source0: field should point to a reliable upstream URL (such as https://github.com/waterbearlang/waterbear/tarball/d26edaa which corresponds to the git commit d26edaa). *** Additions to the source should be in other files, e.g., Source1: waterbear.desktop
...and at that point in the checklist I stopped. Please address these issues and I'll re-review.
Ok I have fixed those issues listed and updated the files.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Greene agreene@learn.senecac.on.ca 2012-05-07 09:49:05 EDT ---
Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team.
New Contents: rpmlint O waterbearlang-waterbear.spec: I: checking-url https://github.com/waterbearlang/waterbear/zipball/master/waterbearlang-wate... (timeout 10 seconds) waterbearlang-waterbear.src: I: checking waterbearlang-waterbear.src: I: checking-url http://waterbearlang.com (timeout 10 seconds) waterbearlang-waterbear.src: I: checking-url https://github.com/waterbearlang/waterbear/zipball/master/waterbearlang-wate... (timeout 10 seconds) waterbearlang-waterbear.noarch: I: checking waterbearlang-waterbear.noarch: I: checking-url http://waterbearlang.com (timeout 10 seconds) 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Greene agreene@learn.senecac.on.ca 2012-05-07 14:12:43 EDT --- ***I have moved the updated files to this directory
Spec URL: http://scotland/~agreene/waterbearlang-waterbear.spec
SRPM URL: http://scotland/~agreene/waterbearlang-waterbear-1.0-5.fc16.src.rpm
RPM URL: http://scotland/~agreene/waterbearlang-waterbear-1.0-5.fc16.noarch.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rc040203@freenet.de
--- Comment #5 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2012-05-15 00:01:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4)
***I have moved the updated files to this directory
Spec URL: http://scotland/~agreene/waterbearlang-waterbear.spec
These URLs all seem inaccessible or wrong (http://scotland ?).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Greene agreene@learn.senecac.on.ca 2012-05-16 13:30:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
***I have moved the updated files to this directory
Spec URL: http://scotland/~agreene/waterbearlang-waterbear.spec
These URLs all seem inaccessible or wrong (http://scotland ?).
I just tried those links and they seem to work for me but either way try these URLS
SPEC FILE https://github.com/downloads/agreene1/inception/waterbearlang-waterbear.spec
SRPM https://github.com/downloads/agreene1/inception/waterbearlang-waterbear-1.0-...
RPM https://github.com/downloads/agreene1/inception/waterbearlang-waterbear-1.0-...
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
--- Comment #7 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2012-05-16 23:41:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #5)
I just tried those links and they seem to work for me but either way try these URLS
Is scotland valid TLD? Would be news to me ;)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Greene agreene@learn.senecac.on.ca 2012-05-17 09:40:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #5)
I just tried those links and they seem to work for me but either way try these URLS
Is scotland valid TLD? Would be news to me ;)
I apologize the url should have been http://scotland.proximity.on.ca/~agreene it was brought to my attention yesterday that scotland only resolves locally.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(agreene@learn.sen | |ecac.on.ca)
--- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu --- I am triaging old review tickets. I apologize that it has been so long since anyone looked at this ticket, but there are more packages submitted now than the pool of reviewers can handle, and some tickets fall through the cracks.
In order to keep the queue manageable, we need to occasionally find tickets which are not reviewable so as to not waste what reviewer time is available. Accordingly, I'm pinging this ticket and setting NEEDINFO. If you are still interested in having your package reviewed, please do the following:
* Make sure your package still reflects the current status of its upstream.
* Check that your package still builds on current Fedora releases.
* Audit your package versus the current status of the packaging guidelines, current rpmlint and current fedora-review tools.
And, finally, reply, making sure that the NEEDINFO flag gets cleared so that this ticket reappears in the review queue. I can't promise a review if you reply, but by closing out the stale tickets we can devote extra attention to the ones which aren't stale.
A couple of comments specifically about this package:
%clean is unnecessary.
Using the default %defattr in %files is unnecessary. It is certainly unnecessary to include it three different times in one %files list.
Might want to fix this rpmlint error (March 14, 2012 was not a Monday):
waterbearlang-waterbear.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Mon Mar 14 2012 Jayaditya Mulwani jmulwani@learn.senecac.on.ca - 1.0-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819008
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED CC| |msuchy@redhat.com Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |DEFERRED Last Closed| |2015-07-21 09:40:09
--- Comment #10 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- Closing due long inactivity. Feel free to reopen if you want to continue.
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org