[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 Jamie Nguyen changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||912104 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZQ2wHSCmRB&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106
Tom Hughes 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 ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= Issues =
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
The license text should really be included with the distributed code
as it is a requirement of both licenses. Certainly we need to add a
copy until upstream includes it.
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
There is a 2.1.5 release upstream now.
It's not clear to me that installing r.js in %{_bindir} is appropriate
or necessary - it doesn't seem to me from the web site that people are
intended to run it from the command line? As shipped it isn't
executable and running it just tells you to look at the web site.
= 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]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[-]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[-]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[-]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/tom/912106-nodejs-requirejs/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: CheckResultdir
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[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)
[!]: 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]
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106
--- Comment #2 from Jamie Nguyen ---
> The license text should really be included with the distributed code
> as it is a requirement of both licenses. Certainly we need to add a
> copy until upstream includes it.
Done.
> There is a 2.1.5 release upstream now.
Updated.
> It's not clear to me that installing r.js in %{_bindir} is appropriate
> or necessary - it doesn't seem to me from the web site that people are
> intended to run it from the command line? As shipped it isn't
> executable and running it just tells you to look at the web site.
Totally agree. I've removed r.js from %{_bindir}. (This happened out of habit
rather than a deliberate decision to put it in %{_bindir}.)
Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/jasmine-node/nodejs-requirejs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/jasmine-node/SRPMS/nodejs-requirejs-2.1.5-1.fc18.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=EFX7IM3Fny&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 Tom Hughes changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Tom Hughes --- I'm not sure that r.js needs the execute permission adding even, but other than that everything looks good now, so package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=x6lyElYcKZ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 --- Comment #4 from Jamie Nguyen --- > I'm not sure that r.js needs the execute permission adding even, > but other than that everything looks good now, so package approved. Ah yes, forgot about that. Fixed! Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/jasmine-node/nodejs-requirejs.spec SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/jasmine-node/SRPMS/nodejs-requirejs-2.1.5-2.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2kROos1Jgm&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 Jamie Nguyen changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jamie Nguyen --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: nodejs-requirejs Short Description: Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules Owners: jamielinux Branches: f18 el6 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=c88njcORS6&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7yq17EHUWK&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-requirejs-2.1.5-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-requirejs-2.1.5-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DSygnQF3Kp&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CNAg79QB1A&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IYC32fdgDJ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-requirejs-2.1.5-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pT4ZPssM3g&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 Jamie Nguyen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2013-03-19 10:11:33 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UKoxr7fwzV&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-requirejs-2.1.5-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zRoPG25mRZ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912106] Review Request: nodejs-requirejs - Node.js adapter for RequireJS, for loading AMD modules
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912106 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=sK1qrF4yzV&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
