[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-05-10 04:36:57



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
qmapshack-1.8.0-1.el7, quazip-qt5-0.7.3-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora
EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in
this bug report.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
qmapshack-1.8.0-1.el7, quazip-qt5-0.7.3-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora
EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in
this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-7788d4f456

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178

Fedora Update System  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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
quazip-qt5-0.7.3-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-7788d4f456

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178



--- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/quazip-qt5

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178

James Hogarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review-  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from James Hogarth  ---
Great, I've tested and based on those changes this is 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178



--- Comment #2 from Dan Horák  ---
Updated Spec URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/quazip-qt5.spec
Updated SRPM URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/quazip-qt5-0.7.3-2.el7.src.rpm


changes
- wrong checksum was caused by wrong Source0 URL
- fixed License, it's LPGLv2+
- marked COPYING as %license
- own cmake dirs for storing modules

I would prefer to keep the docs in the devel subpackage to be close to the
regular quazip package.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178

James Hogarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review-



--- Comment #1 from James Hogarth  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


Issues:
===
- Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
  in the spec URL.
  Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/james/workspace
  /fedora-scm/1439178-quazip-qt5/diff.txt
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL

  * Can you please confirm the source of your tarball as it differs from
upstream

27e4316e41b4368e30f4d013a2fe8010 
1439178-quazip-qt5/upstream-unpacked/Source0/quazip-0.7.3.tar.gz
2ba7dd8b1d6dd588374c9fab5c46e76e 
1439178-quazip-qt5/srpm-unpacked/quazip-0.7.3.tar.gz

- 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.
  Note: License file COPYING is not marked as %license
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text

  * %license works on EPEL7 so it should be used rather than %doc

- Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
  (~1MB) or number of files.
  Note: Documentation size is 1474560 bytes in 204 files.
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation

  * The doc is in devel so I consider this one optional, but it'd be good
practice to move to -doc (or -devel-doc if it's only dev related)

- Spec states LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ but the README and COPYING files indicate LGPL
2.1

  * Please confirm the copyright status and update the spec header accordingly

- There are unowned directories included which need to be owned properly

  * Either the -devel package needs to require cmake3-data (which feels wrong
given development doesn't require cmake)
or the -devel package needs to own /usr/share/cmake3 and
/usr/share/cmake3/Modules.
  *
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
  * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "LGPL (v2.1)",
 "Unknown or generated", "zlib/libpng". 264 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/james/workspace/fedora-
 scm/1439178-quazip-qt5/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
 must be documented in the spec.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/cmake3/Modules, /usr/share/cmake3
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/cmake3,
 /usr/share/cmake3/Modules
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[x]: 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms 

[Bug 1439178] Review Request: quazip-qt5 - Qt5 wrapper for the minizip library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439178

James Hogarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||james.hoga...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|james.hoga...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org