https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2444639
--- Comment #6 from Vít Ondruch <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Maksym Hazevych from comment #3) > Thank you for the review! These were just a few hints. Sorry but I don't have ambitions to do a full review and I might went silent any time. > I've updated the package to properly use the LICENSE file that was already > present in the source, as well as to include licenses of the bundled > dependencies. To get the list of licenses I've modified the project's build > script and ran it right after the commit of the last release. > Here's the build script change: > https://github.com/mks-h/flood/commit/ > 16746a31082d702372bf8dcf3580c721abfad538 > I'll try to upstream this once the package passes review. 👍 > As for the automatic requires and provides, they aren't present in this > package since the project doesn't distribute node_modules. Instead, the > bundle is transformed and minified into chunks of JavaScript files under the > assets directory (plus the entry-point in bin). If the automation worked, that would be for your benefit. But if it does not work, then the provides still needs be provided somehow. This is the JS specific guideline referring to the generic guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/JavaScript/#_bundling_of_other_libraries > I've tried to add a Node.js require in %check, like documented: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Node.js/ > #_build_testing_in_check > But since this isn't a library package, just requiring it makes it run the > webserver (indefinitely). Good effort. The webserver could be run in background and queried by `curl`? There is also a way to run upstream test suite: https://github.com/jesec/flood/blob/cfc961c7e6620f3b53460034305488b1725d7278/package.json#L58 Although I don't know what it does specifically and I would not be surprised if `vitest` is not in Fedora. Checking the Debian package included in the sources, it does something very minimal, but sometimes better than nothing: https://github.com/jesec/flood/blob/master/distribution/debian/flood/tests/pkg-js/test > BTW, is it fine if the release number skips e.g. from 1 to 3 > because of a commit that wasn't used to actually release a build? That is fine. The only thing which matters is upgrade path. So the older package has to have lover NVR (name-version-release) then the new one. You can use `rpmdev-vercmp` for version comparison -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2444639 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202444639%23c6 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
