Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.

Bug 910142

Summary: Review Request: nodejs-send - Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Jamie Nguyen <jamielinux>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Tom Hughes <tom>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: notting, package-review, tom
Target Milestone: ---Flags: tom: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.el6 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-03-19 14:11:03 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On: 910124, 910127, 910140    
Bug Blocks: 910148, 910150    

Description Jamie Nguyen 2013-02-11 21:41:46 UTC
Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-buddycloud-http-api/nodejs-send.spec
SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-buddycloud-http-api/SRPMS/nodejs-send-0.1.0-1.fc18.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: jamielinux

Description:
Send is Connect's static() extracted for generalized use, a streaming static
file server supporting partial responses (Ranges), conditional-GET
negotiation, high test coverage, and granular events which may be leveraged
to take appropriate actions in your application or framework.

Comment 2 Tom Hughes 2013-02-24 15:14:20 UTC
The %check section doesn't look right at all - it is trying to run %{nodejs_sitelib} as a program?

It looks like the tests aren't in the npm tarball anyway, so will need grabbing from upstream as a separate archive.

Comment 3 Jamie Nguyen 2013-02-24 15:29:22 UTC
Oops sorry. That's strange though, as I must have accidentally reverted to an older SRPM at some point during packaging... my notes say "tests pass" for this nodejs-send.

Well whatever happened, it's fixed!

Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-buddycloud-http-api/nodejs-send.spec
SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-buddycloud-http-api/SRPMS/nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc18.src.rpm

Comment 4 Tom Hughes 2013-02-24 16:18:17 UTC
Package Review
==============

Key:
[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]: 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.
[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]: 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 consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[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 do not use a name that already exist
[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 2 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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
     --requires).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
     Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
     Note: Source0 (send-0.1.0.tgz) Source1 (tests-0.1.0.tar.bz2) Source10
     (dl-tests.sh)
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.

===== 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.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc19.src.rpm
          nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc19.noarch.rpm
nodejs-send.src: W: strange-permission dl-tests.sh 0755L
nodejs-send.src: W: invalid-url Source1: tests-0.1.0.tar.bz2
nodejs-send.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/debug /usr/lib/node_modules/debug
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/fresh /usr/lib/node_modules/fresh
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/range-parser /usr/lib/node_modules/range-parser
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/mime /usr/lib/node_modules/mime
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint nodejs-send
nodejs-send.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/debug /usr/lib/node_modules/debug
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/fresh /usr/lib/node_modules/fresh
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/range-parser /usr/lib/node_modules/range-parser
nodejs-send.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/send/node_modules/mime /usr/lib/node_modules/mime
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc19.noarch.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    
    nodejs(engine)
    npm(debug)
    npm(fresh) < 0.2
    npm(fresh) >= 0.1.0
    npm(mime) < 1.3
    npm(mime) >= 1.2.6
    npm(range-parser) < 0.1
    npm(range-parser) >= 0.0.4



Provides
--------
nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc19.noarch.rpm:
    
    nodejs-send = 0.1.0-3.fc19
    npm(send) = 0.1.0



MD5-sum check
-------------
http://registry.npmjs.org/send/-/send-0.1.0.tgz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 28b5a6ec41b5072521eb792cc901b92cdbb6b743c578d7008727dbbd3eb717de
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 28b5a6ec41b5072521eb792cc901b92cdbb6b743c578d7008727dbbd3eb717de


Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 910142

Comment 5 Tom Hughes 2013-02-24 16:47:09 UTC
All good. Package approved.

Comment 6 Jamie Nguyen 2013-02-24 17:06:05 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: nodejs-send
Short Description: Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support
Owners: jamielinux
Branches: f18 el6
InitialCC:

Comment 7 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-02-25 00:09:06 UTC
Complete, clearing flag.

Comment 8 Jamie Nguyen 2013-02-25 11:00:27 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: nodejs-send
Short Description: Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support
Owners: jamielinux
Branches: f18 el6
InitialCC:

Comment 9 Michael Schwendt 2013-02-25 12:45:45 UTC
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: nodejs-send
New Branches: f18 el6
Owners: jamielinux
InitialCC: 

Rationale: The request from comment 6 has not been processed for the Branches other than devel.

Comment 10 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-02-25 22:56:31 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2013-03-02 12:29:45 UTC
nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc18

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2013-03-03 22:28:01 UTC
nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository.

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2013-04-07 00:19:40 UTC
nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2013-05-25 16:01:42 UTC
nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.el6

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2013-06-16 18:32:40 UTC
nodejs-send-0.1.0-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.