Bug 227069

MUST:
X package is named appropriately
 . release should be of the form 0.Z.tag.Xjpp.Y%{?dist}
* it is legal for Fedora to distribute this
X license field matches the actual license.
 . according to their website, it's Apache-style
* license is open source-compatible.
X specfile name matches %{name}
 . specfile should be jaxen-bootstrap.spec
X verify source and patches (md5sum matches upstream, know what the patches do)
 . where do the xsl and xml files come from?
 . we should note why dom4j is needed
* summary and description fine
X correct buildroot
 - should be:
   %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
X %{?dist} needs to be added
X license text included in package and marked with %doc
* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
X rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output

W: jaxen-bootstrap non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java

. fine

W: jaxen-bootstrap invalid-license Open Source

X fix this

W: jaxen-bootstrap unversioned-explicit-provides jaxen-bootstrap

. I think this is an unnecessary provide

W: jaxen-bootstrap rpm-buildroot-usage %prep rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT

. get rid of the rm -rf line at the beginning of prep ...

E: jaxen-bootstrap no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install

... and add it to the beginning of %install

W: jaxen-bootstrap mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 37)

X fix this (emacs M-x untabify)

* changelog in okay format
X Vendor tag should not be used
X Distribution tag should not be used
* use License and not Copyright 
* Summary tag should not end in a period
* no PreReqs
* specfile is legible
X package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86
 . I need xom to build this package
? BuildRequires are proper
 . I'll have to wait to build this to ensure this
* summary is a short and concise description of the package
* description expands upon summary
* make sure lines are <= 80 characters
* specfile written in American English
* no -doc sub-package necessary
* no libraries
* no rpath
* no config files
* not a GUI app
* no -devel sub-package necessary
* macros used appropriately and consistently
* does not use %makeinstall
* no locale data
? consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps (%prep line 4
* no Requires(pre,post)
* package is not be relocatable
* package contains code
* package owns all directories and files
* no %files duplicates
* file permissions okay; %defattrs present
* %clean present
* %doc files should not affect runtime (N/A until licence added)
* not a web app
X final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
 . remove unnecessary Provides: %{name}?
 . I will do the rest when I can build it
X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs
 . I will when I can build it

SHOULD:
X package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc
X package should build on i386
X package should build in mock

Created attachment 148022 [details]
patch that fixes a lot of issues in the spec

I can't verify everything because I can't build it yet due to not having xom. 
I'm also continuing to investigate the source of the xsl and xml files.

Created attachment 148075 [details]
patch for 1.1b7 to clear up issues

> X package is named appropriately
>  . release should be of the form 0.Z.tag.Xjpp.Y%{?dist}

Fixed.	rpmvercmp used to verify that epoch bump not necessary.

> X license field matches the actual license.
>  . according to their website, it's Apache-style

Fixed.

> X specfile name matches %{name}
>  . specfile should be jaxen-bootstrap.spec

Yup.

> X verify source and patches
>  . where do the xsl and xml files come from?
>  . we should note why dom4j is needed

Notes added.  I can't find the source upstream anymore so I don't know how to
verify the md5sums :(

> X correct buildroot
>  - should be:
>    %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)

Fixed.

> X %{?dist} needs to be added

Fixed.

> X license text included in package and marked with %doc

Fixed.

> * packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
> W: jaxen-bootstrap invalid-license Open Source
> 
> X fix this

Fixed.

> W: jaxen-bootstrap unversioned-explicit-provides jaxen-bootstrap
> 
> . I think this is an unnecessary provide

Removed.

> W: jaxen-bootstrap rpm-buildroot-usage %prep rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> 
> . get rid of the rm -rf line at the beginning of prep ...

Done.

> E: jaxen-bootstrap no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
> 
> ... and add it to the beginning of %install

Fixed.

> W: jaxen-bootstrap mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line
37)
> 
> X fix this (emacs M-x untabify)

Done.

> X Vendor tag should not be used
> X Distribution tag should not be used

Fixed, fixed.

> ? consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps (%prep line 4

Unnecessary as it's only used for bootstrap building.

> X final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
>  . remove unnecessary Provides: %{name}?

Done.

I still can't build, but I think other than the that the source can't be found,
everything is taken care of by this patch.  Except perhaps changing the licence
to BSD which is what I think it actually is.

I've got a 1.1 final spec.  I can't make the SRPM until xom is finished, but if
I used a canned upstream xom and comment out the BR, it works fine.  I've put it
here:

http://overholt.ca/fedora/jaxen-bootstrap.spec

Updated jaxen 1.1 for bootstrapping:

http://overholt.ca/fedora/jaxen-bootstrap.spec
http://overholt.ca/fedora/jaxen-bootstrap-1.1-1jpp.1.src.rpm

Approved.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: jaxen-bootstrap
Short Description: A convenience package for build of dom4j
Owners: vivekl
Branches: devel
InitialCC: 

branched

Reassigning to main reviewer.

Closing - in rawhide

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: jaxen-bootstrap
New Branches: el6
Owners: s4504kr

Git done (by process-git-requests).