[Bug 1508510] Review Request: qtools - Simple command-line tools for sending and receiving AMQP messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508510



--- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qtools. You may commit to the branch "f27"
in about 10 minutes.

-- 
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 1508510] Review Request: qtools - Simple command-line tools for sending and receiving AMQP messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508510

Alan Conway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Alan Conway  ---
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 1508510] Review Request: qtools - Simple command-line tools for sending and receiving AMQP messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508510

Irina Boverman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(iboverma@redhat.c |
   |om) |



--- Comment #2 from Irina Boverman  ---
Updated spec file and rpm:
https://irina.fedorapeople.org/

rpmlint qtools-0.3.0-1.fc28.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


rpmlint qtools-0.3.0-1.fc28.noarch.rpm
qtools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qrequest
qtools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qmessage
qtools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qsend
qtools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qtools-test
qtools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qbroker
qtools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qrespond
qtools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qreceive
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.

Man pages will be added upstream at a later date.
Please update the 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

[Bug 1508510] Review Request: qtools - Simple command-line tools for sending and receiving AMQP messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508510

Alan Conway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ibove...@redhat.com
  Flags||needinfo?(iboverma@redhat.c
   ||om)



--- Comment #1 from Alan Conway  ---
Package Review
==

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

Issues:
===
Minor issues, easy to fix:

Found manually

- Source tarball contains .git directory and .gitignore files (not source
files)
- no %check in spec file
- rpmlint errors and warnings, see below

Found by fedora-review program:

- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: make
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- 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 LICENSE.txt is not marked as %license
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text


= 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", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 15
 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/aconway/tmp/qtools/review-qtools/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: Sources contain only permissible code or content (.git directory was
packaged)
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-]: 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.
[x]: 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.
[x]: 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. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 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]: 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]: 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.
[-]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python (package is executable, not
a python library.)
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query 

[Bug 1508510] Review Request: qtools - Simple command-line tools for sending and receiving AMQP messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508510

Irina Boverman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|acon...@redhat.com



-- 
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