https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372888

William Moreno <williamjmore...@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from William Moreno <williamjmore...@gmail.com> ---
Package Aproved
===============

===== 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
     Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 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

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
     provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== SHOULD items =====
[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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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: python2-toro-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
          python3-toro-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
          python-toro-1.0.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
python2-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python2-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python2-toro.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/ajdavis/toro
<urlopen error _ssl.c:629: The handshake operation timed out>
python3-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python3-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python3-toro.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/ajdavis/toro
<urlopen error timed out>
python-toro.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coroutines -> co routines,
co-routines, routines
python-toro.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python-toro.src: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/ajdavis/toro <urlopen
error timed out>
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
python2-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python2-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python3-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python3-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.

Requires
--------
python2-toro (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python2-tornado

python3-toro (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3-tornado

Provides
--------
python2-toro:
    python-toro
    python2-toro
    python2.7dist(toro)
    python2dist(toro)

python3-toro:
    python3-toro
    python3.5dist(toro)
    python3dist(toro)

Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/ajdavis/toro/archive/1.0.1/toro-1.0.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
3093b92b57d18978948e596356b5028944e1cd533cdd88b1b9365cca1669e095
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
3093b92b57d18978948e596356b5028944e1cd533cdd88b1b9365cca1669e095

-- 
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

Reply via email to