[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint New Branches: epel7 Owners: jstribny humaton -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoin |rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoin |t-0.1.4-1.fc22 |t-0.1.4-1.fc21 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint-0.1.4-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint-0.1.4-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint-0.1.4-1.fc21 -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Michael Adam ma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ma...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Michael Adam ma...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint New Branches: f21 Owners: obnox jstribny InitialCC: Need to backport this as a prerequisite for adding vagrant to f21. -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version||rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoin ||t-0.1.4-1.fc22 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2014-10-14 02:17:49 -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Thanks for the review. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint Short Description: Internal HashiCorp service to check version information Upstream URL: http://www.hashicorp.com Owners: jstribny Branches: InitialCC: -- 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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152
František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- srpm file differs from spec file, the spec file has already fixed issues:
- W: invalid-license MPL2 in Licence field
- W: macro-in-comment %{gem_instdir}
- (not an issue) comment about C extensions is not 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. 5 files have unknown license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[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 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.
Ruby:
[-]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform
independent under %{gem_dir}.
[x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage
[x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated.
[x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name}
[x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel.
[x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro.
[x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch
[x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi).
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
Note: Package contains font files
[-]: 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.
[?]: Package functions as described.
Note: ruby -e require 'checkpoint' OK
[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
[Bug 1150152] Review Request: rubygem-hashicorp-checkpoint - Internal HashiCorp service to check version information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150152 František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||val...@civ.zcu.cz Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|val...@civ.zcu.cz Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz --- Taking the review. Could you review rubygem-openssl_cms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1132008 ? (or pick any other) -- 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
