https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069871
Robert Rati <rr...@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Robert Rati <rr...@redhat.com> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable Issues: ======= - Please add a comment re: tests being skipped in the spec ===== 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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 20480 bytes in 3 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 %doc. [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]: 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 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 %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Java: [x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build ===== 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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 architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. Please provide a comment as to why tests are not run. Looks like missing deps. [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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [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: akka-2.3.0-1.fc21.noarch.rpm akka-javadoc-2.3.0-1.fc21.noarch.rpm akka-2.3.0-1.fc21.src.rpm akka.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Scalable -> Salable, Callable, Calculable akka.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Scalable -> Salable, Callable, Calculable 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint akka akka-javadoc akka.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Scalable -> Salable, Callable, Calculable 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- akka (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): java-headless javapackages-tools jpackage-utils mvn(com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java) mvn(com.typesafe:config) mvn(io.netty:netty:3) mvn(org.eclipse.osgi:org.eclipse.osgi) mvn(org.scala-lang:scala-library) mvn(org.scala-stm:scala-stm_2.10) mvn(org.slf4j:slf4j-api) mvn(org.uncommons.maths:uncommons-maths) akka-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils Provides -------- akka: akka mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-actor_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-agent_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-cluster_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-dataflow_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-kernel_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-osgi_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-remote_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-slf4j_2.10) mvn(com.typesafe.akka:akka-transactor_2.10) akka-javadoc: akka-javadoc Source checksums ---------------- http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-transactor_2.10/2.3.0/akka-transactor_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : af5a69249fb5da260165b9c494aaecf61ae36830be2edb0fcd6d109c3ad07e6d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : af5a69249fb5da260165b9c494aaecf61ae36830be2edb0fcd6d109c3ad07e6d http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-actor_2.10/2.3.0/akka-actor_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f11249cf0d90b155fa18d848f32fce8cd9ca156c7ee941e32573c83ee8ade69d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f11249cf0d90b155fa18d848f32fce8cd9ca156c7ee941e32573c83ee8ade69d http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-agent_2.10/2.3.0/akka-agent_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 05cb82ca24690469e41f8f1d26ff13efc4b00ed63724664e9c2d248243da6255 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 05cb82ca24690469e41f8f1d26ff13efc4b00ed63724664e9c2d248243da6255 https://github.com/akka/akka/archive/v2.3.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e051efe518ef9a067913b493168df8a2c86a978a461739f1698e5dd05f7e2430 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e051efe518ef9a067913b493168df8a2c86a978a461739f1698e5dd05f7e2430 https://raw.github.com/willb/rpm-packaging/85bb1497a483faef89749cd4704b04a23bf32e5d/akka-packaging/akka-build.xml : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b9ca2add3f34e554684bbbdda2ff4713d55f7180b9e08045174b7917d8641999 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b9ca2add3f34e554684bbbdda2ff4713d55f7180b9e08045174b7917d8641999 http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-kernel_2.10/2.3.0/akka-kernel_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 38235e97e8eb8705f47d9beefd06e9a89e0b6670c320616cc19c7cca0eafcd0d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 38235e97e8eb8705f47d9beefd06e9a89e0b6670c320616cc19c7cca0eafcd0d http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-osgi_2.10/2.3.0/akka-osgi_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 7bec8213c47adebd7cdbbe58b797cfc83aad8a870f53b6123448149ac0e61c59 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 7bec8213c47adebd7cdbbe58b797cfc83aad8a870f53b6123448149ac0e61c59 http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-cluster_2.10/2.3.0/akka-cluster_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 47e42495aea79442da48d8f61357df0b83e175eb662314c30a1234b10138a77a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 47e42495aea79442da48d8f61357df0b83e175eb662314c30a1234b10138a77a http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-dataflow_2.10/2.3.0/akka-dataflow_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 7cac1fdcf02ca9b5f0d346311f2f509d241cd5fccd6f7fad06262723492a3017 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 7cac1fdcf02ca9b5f0d346311f2f509d241cd5fccd6f7fad06262723492a3017 http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-remote_2.10/2.3.0/akka-remote_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 302a66241f3073592f26c85b212056469c5c1de6507e507ebd2ac451b7d727c9 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 302a66241f3073592f26c85b212056469c5c1de6507e507ebd2ac451b7d727c9 http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/typesafe/akka/akka-slf4j_2.10/2.3.0/akka-slf4j_2.10-2.3.0.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2a74e816154045bf446ba99df96bee3553146d63595cae05d3393f70e7881b4b CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2a74e816154045bf446ba99df96bee3553146d63595cae05d3393f70e7881b4b APPROVED -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review