Built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7497810

Needs for recent warp.

APPROVED.

Package Review
==============

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



===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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 must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[x]: 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.
[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.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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 153600 bytes in 21 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 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

Haskell:
[x]: This should never happen

...but it did. ;)

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: 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.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[?]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
          ghc-http-date-devel-0.0.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
          ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc20.src.rpm
ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter
ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter
ghc-http-date.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter
ghc-http-date.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint ghc-http-date-devel ghc-http-date
ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter
ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
ghc-http-date-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /bin/sh
    ghc(http-date-0.0.4-1da1f7af7d270b1921bf514935313358)
    ghc-compiler
    ghc-devel(array-0.4.0.1-3b78425c10ff2dad7acf7e8c8ae014c3)
    ghc-devel(attoparsec-0.10.4.0-d9fd97cfc1a1748b3cde35adf7fd233b)
    ghc-devel(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57)
    ghc-devel(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f)
    ghc-http-date(x86-64)

ghc-http-date (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ghc(array-0.4.0.1-3b78425c10ff2dad7acf7e8c8ae014c3)
    ghc(attoparsec-0.10.4.0-d9fd97cfc1a1748b3cde35adf7fd233b)
    ghc(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57)
    ghc(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f)
    libHSarray-0.4.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHSattoparsec-0.10.4.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHSbase-4.6.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHSbytestring-0.10.0.2-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHScontainers-0.5.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHSdeepseq-1.3.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHSghc-prim-0.3.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHSinteger-gmp-0.5.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libHStext-0.11.3.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgmp.so.10()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)



Provides
--------
ghc-http-date-devel:
    ghc-devel(http-date-0.0.4-1da1f7af7d270b1921bf514935313358)
    ghc-http-date-devel
    ghc-http-date-devel(x86-64)
    ghc-http-date-static

ghc-http-date:
    ghc(http-date-0.0.4-1da1f7af7d270b1921bf514935313358)
    ghc-http-date
    ghc-http-date(x86-64)
    libHShttp-date-0.0.4-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)



Unversioned so-files
--------------------
ghc-http-date: /usr/lib64/ghc-7.6.3/http-date-0.0.4/libHShttp-date-0.0.4-ghc7.6.3.so

Source checksums
----------------
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/http-date-0.0.4/http-date-0.0.4.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 25228b2456b319c7c777ea3673f441ddf68881da176b37c51feab2108d0175dd
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 25228b2456b319c7c777ea3673f441ddf68881da176b37c51feab2108d0175dd


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1135906
Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Haskell, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

Thanks for the review


New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: ghc-http-date
Short Description: HTTP Date parser and formatter
Upstream URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/http-date
Owners: petersen codeblock
Branches: f21 f20 f19 epel7 el6
InitialCC: haskell-sig

Git done (by process-git-requests).

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc21

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc20

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.el7

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc19

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository.

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.

ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.