[Bug 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 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 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 --- 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 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2014-03-31 15:33:28 -- 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 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1082332 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082332 [Bug 1082332] Review Request: nodejs-tiny-lr-fork - A tiny LiveReload server implementation you can spawn in the background -- 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 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 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? -- 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 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 --- Comment #1 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu --- This is missing a BR on nopt. -- 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 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 --- Comment #2 from Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org --- Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/nodejs-noptify.spec SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/SRPMS/nodejs-noptify-0.0.3-2.fc21.src.rpm * Sun Mar 30 2014 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org - 0.0.3-2 - add BR: npm(nopt) -- 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 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330
--- Comment #3 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. No licenses
found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
[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 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 %doc.
[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]: 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.
[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
[x]: 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.
[-]: 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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[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:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached
diff).
See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Rpmlint
---
Checking:
[Bug 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu --- Make sure you use the newer spec from the srpm, but other than that the package 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1082330] Review Request: nodejs-noptify - A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082330 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: nodejs-noptify Short Description: A wrapper for the nopt module with a commander-like API Owners: jamielinux patches Branches: f19 f20 el6 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
