Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 Marc Deop <marc(a)marcdeop.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|rawhide |17 Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(marc(a)marcdeop.com | |) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |rdieter(a)math.unl.edu Flags| |fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 --- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; --- Package Review ============== Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= [!]: 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. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#ValidLicenseS... ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [ ]: 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. [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries. [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [ ]: 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 [ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [ ]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [ ]: 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. [!]: 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. [ ]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [ ]: Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package installs properly. [ ]: Package is not relocatable. [ ]: 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. [ ]: 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: Test run failed [ ]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Note: Test run failed ===== 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. [ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [ ]: Package functions as described. [ ]: Latest version is packaged. [ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [ ]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [!]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. Note: Source0 (omnicppcomplete-0.41.zip) [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. [ ]: 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. [ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Test run failed Rpmlint ------- Checking: vim-omnicppcomplete-0.41-1.fc18.noarch.rpm vim-omnicppcomplete-0.41-1.fc18.src.rpm vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) omnifunc -> omniscience vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C vim c++ completion omnifunc with a ctags database vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US namespaces -> name spaces, name-spaces, names paces vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US structs -> struts, obstructs, destructs vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> eh, e, g vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myObject -> my Object, my-object, object vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US typedef -> type def, type-def, typeface vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US struct -> strict, strut, struck vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datas -> data, data's, dates vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tokenized -> tokenism vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C This script is for vim 7.0 or higher, it provides C/C++ completion thanks to a ctags database. vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - Complete inherited members for classes and structs (single and multiple inheritance). vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - Complete anonymous types (eg: struct {int a; int b;}g_Var; g_Var.???). It also works for a typedef of an anonymous type. vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - Ambiguous namespaces are detected and are not included in the context stack. vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - The parsed code is tokenized so you can run a completion even if the current vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C instruction has bad indentation, spaces, comments or carriage returns between words vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: non-standard-group Application/Editors vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: dangerous-command-in-%postun rm vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) omnifunc -> omniscience vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) ctags -> crags, tags, stags vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C vim c++ completion omnifunc with a ctags database vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ctags -> crags, tags, stags vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US namespaces -> name spaces, name-spaces, names paces vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US structs -> struts, obstructs, destructs vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> eh, e, g vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myObject -> my Object, my-object, object vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US typedef -> type def, type-def, typeface vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US struct -> strict, strut, struck vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datas -> data, data's, dates vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tokenized -> tokenism vim-omnicppcomplete.src: E: description-line-too-long C This script is for vim 7.0 or higher, it provides C/C++ completion thanks to a ctags database. vim-omnicppcomplete.src: E: description-line-too-long C - Complete inherited members for classes and structs (single and multiple inheritance). vim-omnicppcomplete.src: E: description-line-too-long C - Complete anonymous types (eg: struct {int a; int b;}g_Var; g_Var.???). It also works for a typedef of an anonymous type. vim-omnicppcomplete.src: E: description-line-too-long C - Ambiguous namespaces are detected and are not included in the context stack. vim-omnicppcomplete.src: E: description-line-too-long C - The parsed code is tokenized so you can run a completion even if the current vim-omnicppcomplete.src: E: description-line-too-long C instruction has bad indentation, spaces, comments or carriage returns between words vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: non-standard-group Application/Editors vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: invalid-license GPL vim-omnicppcomplete.src: W: invalid-url Source0: omnicppcomplete-0.41.zip 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 12 errors, 28 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint vim-omnicppcomplete vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) omnifunc -> omniscience vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C vim c++ completion omnifunc with a ctags database vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US namespaces -> name spaces, name-spaces, names paces vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US structs -> struts, obstructs, instructs vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> eh, e, g vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US myObject -> my Object, my-object, object vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US typedef -> type def, type-def, typeface vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US struct -> strict, strut, struck vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datas -> data, dates, data s vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tokenized -> tokenism vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C This script is for vim 7.0 or higher, it provides C/C++ completion thanks to a ctags database. vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - Complete inherited members for classes and structs (single and multiple inheritance). vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - Complete anonymous types (eg: struct {int a; int b;}g_Var; g_Var.???). It also works for a typedef of an anonymous type. vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - Ambiguous namespaces are detected and are not included in the context stack. vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C - The parsed code is tokenized so you can run a completion even if the current vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C instruction has bad indentation, spaces, comments or carriage returns between words vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: non-standard-group Application/Editors vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL vim-omnicppcomplete.noarch: W: dangerous-command-in-%postun rm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 13 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- vim-omnicppcomplete-0.41-1.fc18.noarch.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ctags vim vim-common Provides -------- vim-omnicppcomplete-0.41-1.fc18.noarch.rpm: vim-omnicppcomplete = 0.41-1.fc18 MD5-sum check ------------- Using local file /home/rdieter1/pkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/vim-omnicppcomplete/omnicppcomplete-0.41.zip as upstream file:///home/rdieter1/pkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/vim-omnicppcomplete/omn... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 7f0f3e870674458548bf219cba70ae11a5a7076399ca3fc2380982b61fb9d2da CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 7f0f3e870674458548bf219cba70ae11a5a7076399ca3fc2380982b61fb9d2da Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16 Buildroot used: fedora-18-x86_64 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -c --name=vim-omnicppcomplete Cliff's notes version of all that: 1. MUST fix licensing, 2 issues really a. License: tag is not valid, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses (short names) b. I don't see any mention of GPL anywhere. source files with copyright/license statement or a an statement from the author about licensing is required 2. SHOULD remove scriptlets (discussed on irc), and Requires(post): vim Requires(postun): vim 3. MUST replace Requires: vim-common,ctags with Requires: ctags Requires: vim-filesystem (whether you use one line or 2, is a matter of taste, point is replace vim-common with vim-filesystem) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|17 |rawhide Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; --- APPROVED. Small nice-to-have things i'd like to see prior to any official builds done however, 1. include reference to upstream commits about licensing as a comment in .spec or even better, include those commits as patches (for former is easier of course) 2. remove empty %post, %postun -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 --- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; --- Marc go ahead and import into rawhide. I'll be happy to review (and fix/collaborate things as needed). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xpSJdT3TF1&a=cc_unsubscribe

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 --- Comment #9 from Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; --- ping again, will close as a dead/stalled review if no response after another week -- 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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 --- Comment #11 from Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; --- Great! glad to hear from you, looking forward to seeing it. Please let me know if you have any other questions or need anything else. -- 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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 Marc Deop <marc(a)marcdeop.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822283 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com&gt; --- 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