Bug 435598

One informal review remark concerning licensing:

You've used the BSD license in the spec file, but:

There is a MIT license mentioned in pom.xml:
    <license>
      <name>MIT License</name>
      <url>http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php</url>
      <distribution>repo</distribution>
    </license>

And there is also the MIT license included in the source files (Modern Style
with sublicense -- see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/MIT for details).

What is a bit confusing is the project's site, because there is a disclaimer:
"Distributed under a tri-license (CPL/GPL/LGPL)". This should be probably
clarified with upstream (for what parts of JRuby this applies), nevertheless
according to the source files now you should use License: MIT.

Otherwise it seems ok for me.

(In reply to comment #1)
> One informal review remark concerning licensing:
> 
> You've used the BSD license in the spec file, but:
> 
> There is a MIT license mentioned in pom.xml:
>     <license>
>       <name>MIT License</name>
>       <url>http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php</url>
>       <distribution>repo</distribution>
>     </license>
> 
> And there is also the MIT license included in the source files (Modern Style
> with sublicense -- see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/MIT for 
details).
> 
> What is a bit confusing is the project's site, because there is a disclaimer:
> "Distributed under a tri-license (CPL/GPL/LGPL)". This should be probably
> clarified with upstream (for what parts of JRuby this applies), nevertheless
> according to the source files now you should use License: MIT.
> 
> Otherwise it seems ok for me.

Yes, sorry, I noticed this and fixed it in my current spec file, but didn't 
feel ready to upload that unless there were no other packaging issues.

No hurry with this really, until the java guidelines are done :/

New URLS:
Spec: http://konrad.sobertillnoon.com/fedora/joni.spec
SRPM: http://konrad.sobertillnoon.com/fedora/joni-1.0.1-2.fc8.src.rpm

INFO:
Now (at least on rawhide) java-1.7.0-icedtea is replaced by
java-1.6.0-openjdk

Whoops, appears the spec for 1.0.1-2 was not actually uploaded. Fixing that.

Ahhhh, I'm giving you the wrong URLs. Doh!
Actual URLs for 1.0.1-2:
Spec: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/joni.spec
SRPM: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/joni-1.0.1-2.fc8.src.rpm

Well, no problem

- srpm builds
  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=517581
- binary actually rebuilt from FOSS text source.
- spec file okay
- can be installed

! Please add pom.xml to %doc to clarify this is MIT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      This package (joni) is APPROVED by me
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: joni
Short Description: Java regexp library
Owners: konradm
Branches: F-8
InitialCC: 
Cvsextras Commits: yes

Well, as we don't have java guidelines yet, we shouldn't approve import java
packages. I'm afraid I don't have much of a cite of this, but all of the obvious
java packages are blocking F_GUIDELINES. 

Perhaps we could get someone from packaging to confirm that no new java packages
should be reviewed/approved/imported until guidelines are complete?

And perhaps the submitter and reviewer could work on getting the java package
guidelines finalized? 

Sorry, but there are a lot of Java packages in Fedora already, so I really 
don't see why this successfully-reviewed package shouldn't get imported!

Once the draft guidelines are finalized, packages can be fixed if they don't 
conform to them.

Resetting fedora-cvs.

See also: 
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-March/msg01484.html

Well, actually for this package there is no issues to fix anymore.
Also we can fix the existing Java packages once Java packaging guidelines
are approved.

Resetting fedora-review+.

The java package guidelines have been passed by the packaging folks, and 
approved by FESCO. 

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Java
(will likely be moved from PackagingDrafts to Packaging soon). 

Can you please re-check this package against the approved guidelines? 
Thanks. 

Well now Java packaging guidelines are imported, so
- Would you check the "Requires" of java (especially Epoch dependency)
  per the section "BuildRequires and Requires" of
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java ?

New URLs:
Spec: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/joni.spec
SRPM: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/joni-1.0.2-3.fc8.src.rpm

Note: I tried to build with GCJ AOT bits, but this consumed >1.5 gigs of ram 
and swap before I killed it (and kept growing). So this spec/srpm doesn't build 
AOT bits.

OK, I have joni building with AOT bits now. URLs:
Spec: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/joni.spec
SRPM: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/joni-1.0.2-4.fc8.src.rpm

Well, okay (now I have to rewrite _my_ java related packages :) )

---------------------------------------------------------------------
      This package (joni) is APPROVED by me
---------------------------------------------------------------------

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: joni
Short Description: Java regular expression library
Owners: konradm
Branches: F-8
InitialCC: 
Cvsextras Commits: yes

cvs done.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: joni
New Branches: EL-5

cvs done.