| Summary: | Review Request: caffeine - High performance java 8 caching library | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Tomas Repik <trepik> | ||||
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | gil cattaneo <puntogil> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | medium | ||||||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | package-review, puntogil | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | puntogil:
fedora-review+
|
||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2016-12-10 00:25:42 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Tomas Repik
2016-11-21 13:48:05 UTC
have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290342 ? Is available a new relase 2.3.5. Please, consider updating Please, use: Source0: https://github.com/ben-manes/%{name}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz instead of Source0: https://github.com/ben-manes/%{name}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Note: Jar files in source (see attachment) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Pre- built_JAR_files_.2F_Other_bundled_software' Please, add find -name "*.jar" -delete in %prep section ===== 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. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "*No copyright* GPL (v2)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 13 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1397051-caffeine/licensecheck.txt GPL (v2) caffeine-2.3.3/caffeine/src/jmh/java/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/impl/ConcurrentHashMapV7.java but not used/packaged CC-BY 4.0 caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/cache2k/LICENSE.txt caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/cache2k/orm-busy.trace.xz caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/cache2k/orm-night.trace.xz caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/cache2k/web07.trace.xz caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/cache2k/web12.trace.xz but not used/packaged [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [?]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/lirs/lirs.c caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/lirs/lirs.h but not used/packaged see caffeine-2.3.3/simulator/src/main/resources/com/github/benmanes/caffeine/cache/simulator/parser/lirs/README [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [?]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. see above [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: 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. [-]: 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. [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 10240 bytes in 1 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 %license. [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]: 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]: 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 Java: [x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It is pulled in by maven-local [x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage [x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils [x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink) Maven: [x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even when building with ant [x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping [x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging [x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used [x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage- utils for %update_maven_depmap macro [x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun [x]: Packages use .mfiles file list instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms ===== 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in caffeine-javadoc [x]: Package functions as described. [?]: Latest version is packaged. latest release depend on guava 20.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307246 [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [?]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: 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]: 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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Java: [x]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) [x]: Packages are noarch unless they use JNI ===== 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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: caffeine-2.3.3-1.fc26.noarch.rpm caffeine-javadoc-2.3.3-1.fc26.noarch.rpm caffeine-2.3.3-1.fc26.src.rpm caffeine.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recency -> decency, regency, rec ency caffeine.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recency -> decency, regency, rec ency caffeine.src:70: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 70, tab: line 1) 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- caffeine.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recency -> decency, regency, rec ency 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- caffeine-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): javapackages-tools caffeine (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): java-headless javapackages-tools Provides -------- caffeine-javadoc: caffeine-javadoc caffeine: caffeine mvn(com.github.ben-manes.caffeine:caffeine) mvn(com.github.ben-manes.caffeine:caffeine:pom:) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/ben-manes/caffeine/archive/v2.3.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1718f6b9ad6b405e6a3925d91c8d8b41fea45abd707bdfbda4e2334523a651d3 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1718f6b9ad6b405e6a3925d91c8d8b41fea45abd707bdfbda4e2334523a651d3 https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/github/ben-manes/caffeine/caffeine/2.3.3/caffeine-2.3.3.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 04cec3c1048a5ddf385ab40f945ad3e34d906190bcb08646b205fc7327366b46 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 04cec3c1048a5ddf385ab40f945ad3e34d906190bcb08646b205fc7327366b46 Jar and class files in source ----------------------------- ./caffeine-2.3.3/gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1397051 --plugins Java -m fedora-rawhide-i386 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Java Disabled plugins: C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 Issues: - Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Note: Jar files in source (see attachment) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Pre- built_JAR_files_.2F_Other_bundled_software' Please, add find -name "*.jar" -delete in %prep section Please, use: Source0: https://github.com/ben-manes/%{name}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz instead of Source0: https://github.com/ben-manes/%{name}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz Only a question can you build guava and jcache sub modules? can you add
%pom_xpath_inject "pom:project" "<packaging>bundle</packaging>"
%pom_add_plugin org.apache.felix:maven-bundle-plugin . "
<extensions>true</extensions>
<configuration>
<excludeDependencies>true</excludeDependencies>
<instructions>
<Bundle-SymbolicName>com.github.ben-manes.caffeine</Bundle-SymbolicName>
<Bundle-Name>com.github.ben-manes.caffeine</Bundle-Name>
<Bundle-Version>\${project.version}</Bundle-Version>
</instructions>
</configuration>
<executions>
<execution>
<id>bundle-manifest</id>
<phase>process-classes</phase>
<goals>
<goal>manifest</goal>
</goals>
</execution>
</executions>"
Spec URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine.spec SRPM URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24.src.rpm - added maven-plugin-bundle - changed Source0 - version updated to latest upstream version - patch removed I don't need the extension modules (guava, jcache) therefore I don't build those. Do you need them for something? (In reply to Tomas Repik from comment #8) > Spec URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine.spec > SRPM URL: > https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24.src.rpm > > - added maven-plugin-bundle > - changed Source0 > - version updated to latest upstream version > - patch removed Are still present jar/class files. Please, remove them adding find -name "*.jar" -delete in %prep section > I don't need the extension modules (guava, jcache) therefore I don't build > those. Do you need them for something? At the moment I do not remember, but if possible, it is possible to enable them the same? Created attachment 1222731 [details] spec file i done some changes in Your spec files, i had wrote as early, guava extension sub module is not buildable, with the guava release in our repository Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16562990 (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #9) > Are still present jar/class files. Please, remove them adding > find -name "*.jar" -delete > in %prep section Sorry, I missed it, I will include it in the next "version". (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10) > Created attachment 1222731 [details] > spec file Thanks for the Spec updated do you think we can do both extensions optional? Use %bcond_with with the jcache submodule as well? I also have to ask why do you do: %mvn_package :%{name}-parent __noinstall Is the parent not necessary? In which cases it would be needed? (In reply to Tomas Repik from comment #11) > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #9) > > Are still present jar/class files. Please, remove them adding > > find -name "*.jar" -delete > > in %prep section > > Sorry, I missed it, I will include it in the next "version". Please, do it now > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10) > > Created attachment 1222731 [details] > > spec file > > Thanks for the Spec updated do you think we can do both extensions optional? > Use %bcond_with with the jcache submodule as well? Yes, sure > I also have to ask why do > you do: %mvn_package :%{name}-parent __noinstall Is the parent not > necessary? In which cases it would be needed? It is only necessary to aggregate the various sub modules, during the generation, should only be necessary when each POM, in their header, in the sub-modules, has its references Spec URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v2/caffeine.spec SRPM URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v2/caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24.src.rpm - removing jars in %prep section - added optional extensions jcache and guava, with the later not working yet Anything else? Sorry for delay, i have some problem with my web connection. Approved Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/caffeine caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-7095ba897b caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-2b3cb37c1c caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-2b3cb37c1c caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-7095ba897b caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |