[Bug 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|nodejs-write-file-atomic-1. |nodejs-write-file-atomic-1. |1.2-2.fc21 |1.2-2.el7 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||nodejs-write-file-atomic-1. ||1.2-2.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-07-15 22:33:31 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|nodejs-write-file-atomic-1. |nodejs-write-file-atomic-1. |1.2-2.fc22 |1.2-2.fc21 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc22 -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.el7 -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #11 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Zuzana Svetlikova zsvet...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Zuzana Svetlikova zsvet...@redhat.com --- Thank you! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: nodejs-write-file-atomic Short Description: Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership Upstream URL: https://github.com/iarna/write-file-atomic Owners: zvetlik Branches: f21 f22 el6 epel7 -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540
--- Comment #8 from Tom Hughes t...@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.
[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. 2 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/tom/1221540-nodejs-write-file-
atomic/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]: 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]: 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.
[x]: %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-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc23.noarch.rpm
[Bug 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu --- Looks good now. Package 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
[Bug 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #7 from Zuzana Svetlikova zsvet...@redhat.com --- Rebuilt on f22. Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-write-file-atomic/nodejs-write-file-atomic.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-write-file-atomic/nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc22.src.rpm -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #5 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu --- I think you can likely just fixdep graceful-fs as the tests do pass with the version that is in 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #6 from Zuzana Svetlikova zsvet...@redhat.com --- I already did that, I just don't consider this a real fix and there's a lot of other packages dependent on new version of graceful-fs. -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #4 from Zuzana Svetlikova zsvet...@redhat.com --- Fixed the dependency with macro, I will try to contact the maintainer about updating nodejs-graceful-fs. Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-write-file-atomic/nodejs-write-file-atomic.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-write-file-atomic/nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-2.fc21.src.rpm -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540
--- Comment #3 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
= Issues ==
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
Email address is missing in header of the most recent entry.
[!]: Install of built package on rawhide fails.
Error: Package: nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-1.fc23.noarch
(/nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-1.fc23.noarch)
Requires: npm(graceful-fs) = 3.0.2
Installing: nodejs-graceful-fs-2.0.0-4.fc21.noarch (fedora)
npm(graceful-fs) = 2.0.0
= 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. 2 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/tom/1221540-nodejs-write-file-
atomic/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: 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]: 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]: 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.
[x]: %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
[Bug 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 --- Comment #2 from Zuzana Svetlikova zsvet...@redhat.com --- Rebuilt with new release. Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-write-file-atomic/nodejs-write-file-atomic.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-write-file-atomic/nodejs-write-file-atomic-1.1.2-1.fc21.src.rpm -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||t...@compton.nu Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|t...@compton.nu Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu --- Fails to build in mock as it requires npm(require-inject) which isn't available. I'm guessing you meant to leave the tests disabled for now? Also it looks like you need to ask upstream to add the license text, and add it locally until that is done. -- 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 1221540] Review Request: nodejs-write-file-atomic - Write files in an atomic fashion w/configurable ownership
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221540 Zuzana Svetlikova zsvet...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||956806 (nodejs-reviews) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806 [Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker -- 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
