Bug 439263
Summary: | Review Request: javahelp2 - needed for NetBeans Platform | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach> | ||||
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Colin Walters <walters> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||
Priority: | low | ||||||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, fitzsim, j, kevin, mycae, notting, overholt, victor.vasilyev, walters | ||||
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | walters:
fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+ |
||||
Target Release: | --- | ||||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
Last Closed: | 2008-06-26 15:37:32 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
Embargoed: | |||||||
Bug Depends On: | |||||||
Bug Blocks: | 439265, 456341 | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Jaroslav Tulach
2008-03-27 19:01:22 UTC
In a quick glance: * %mkrel problem * BuildRoot needs to have release at least, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-b4fdd45fa76cbf54c885ef0836361319ab962473 * I don't understand the purpose of the javadoc %pre and %post * Is there a reason the two shell scripts can't be included upstream? (not a requirement, just asking) OK, hopefully done: SRPM URL: http://www.xelfi.cz/download/dev/SRPMS/javahelp2-2.0.05-3.src.rpm Spec URL: http://www.xelfi.cz/download/dev/SRPMS/javahelp2.spec A few comments as I come up to speed with reviewing Java packages using our fancy new guidelines: This builds and installs OK. rpmlint says: javahelp2.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 31) Not a big deal; fix it if you like. javahelp2.src: W: non-standard-group Development/Java This is fine; we don't really care about Group. javahelp2.src: E: no-changelogname-tag There is no changelog section at all. One is required, and the entries need to be in one of the formats from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs javahelp2.src: W: strange-permission javahelp2-jhindexer.sh 0755 javahelp2.src: W: strange-permission javahelp2-jhsearch.sh 0755 This isn't a real problem; usually you don't depend on permissions on files extracted from the srpm but as long as they aren't mode 666 or something it's not an issue. It would be nice for you to answer Colin's question from comment 1. The summary, well, isn't really a summary. Can you come up with a 70-character summary of this package? According to the guidelines, you need an epoch on your java-devel requirement: BuildRequires: java-devel >= 1:1.6.0 The main package needs a dependency on java and the javadoc package needs at least a dependency on jpackage-utils (so that /usr/share/javadoc is owned properly). There seems to be some sort of test suite in jhMaster/JavaHelp/test. I do not know if it is something that is runnable at build time, but if it is then you need to add a %check section. * source files match upstream: 338b3888bd3b058a6d9c65ad5fe15d4effbe6c13a15d6da1c5390a06f0b69757 javahelp2-src-2.0.05.zip * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. X No changelog section. X summary isn't really a summary. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. X BuildRequires not quite right. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. X rpmlint has a valid complaint. X final provides and requires are not quite right: javahelp2-2.0.05-3.fc9.noarch.rpm javahelp2 = 0:2.0.05-3.fc9 = /bin/sh jpackage-utils >= 0:1.5.32 X (no dependency on java) javahelp2-javadoc-2.0.05-3.fc9.noarch.rpm javahelp2-javadoc = 0:2.0.05-3.fc9 = X (no dependency on jpackage-utils) ? %check is not present, but there seems to be a test suite. Can it be run at build time? * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. Java-specific bits: * no pre-built jars * single jar, named after the package * jarfiles are under _javadir. * javadocs are under _javadocdir. Use "full-featured, platform-independent, extensible help system", I do not care. Log is missing, because mandriva generates the log file automatically from svn logs. Just think something up, it is first fedora release anyway. We do not really control upstream project, that is why I prefer not to add anything there. I know nothing about the test suite. I never tried to run it. My expectation is that it will miss some fancy test harness from Sun. All that you want to change is OK from my point of view. I just want the library to be package. I do not care much how. Thanks a lot for your help. I think there must be some confusion here. If this package is approved, you will the maintainer of the package in Fedora. Therefore it is up to you to care about things like the summary and the changelog. What Mandriva does is of absolutely no consequence here; you must provide a package which is acceptable to Fedora. You shouldn't tell me to add something, because my function is to check the package for acceptability, not to apply any fixes to it. I understand that you want the library to be packaged, but your role in the process is far more than just dropping the package in a bugzilla ticket and being done with it. You must maintain it in Fedora. You must respond to bugzilla tickets filed against it and such, issue builds and update notices, etc. You should know about the test suite, or find out about it, because that is your function as the maintainer of the package. Also, I have a feeling from your responses that this is your first package submission, and if that's the case then you will need a sponsor. Honestly I'm going to need to see from you a much greater understanding of how things work in Fedora before I personally would be willing to sponsor you. Thus I'm going to unassign myself from this ticket, and refer you to some documents in our wiki: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Jason, for some reason you became upset. Sorry for you. Looks like it is my fault, so I apologize for wasting your time. Jaroslav, do you think you could add an initial %changelog and tweak the dependencies? As an aside I'd like to see Fedora do the %changelog generation too, nice to hear Mandriva does it, but for now we require %changelog. Thanks for helping me Colin. Here is SRPM updated with changelog: http://www.xelfi.cz/download/dev/SRPMS/javahelp2-2.0.05-4.src.rpm I hope there are no other blocking issues. Jaroslav: can you post a new .spec as well? Looking at the .spec from that SRPM, I still see a few issues (in addition to the other concerns above): - remove the Epoch entirely - write a summary - it seems odd that jhall.jar is being installed as javahelp-%{version}.jar - add java as a Requires - add a version into the most recent changelog entry I've updated the version at http://www.xelfi.cz/download/dev/SRPMS/javahelp2-2.0.05-4.src.rpm to fix everything except the jhall.jar issue. Imho, it is better to have javahelp-%{version}.jar as jhall is some relict from past when people believe that javahelp shall have two parts. Now it is one package anyway, so it does not make sense to produce more than one JAR and call it as jhclient, jhall, etc. Okay, thanks for the thoughts about jhall.jar. I agree. Can you post a .spec URL as well, please? Also, it's typical that one bumps the release in the specfile for each change they make -- like bumping it to -5 and adding a changelog comment like "Removed epoch and did other stuff as per Fedora review". Try #5: SRPM URL: http://www.xelfi.cz/download/dev/SRPMS/javahelp2-2.0.05-5.src.rpm Spec URL: http://www.xelfi.cz/download/dev/SRPMS/javahelp2.spec A small rpmlint issue: javahelp2.noarch: W: no-documentation But looking at the upstream sources, I don't see anything like a README, COPYING, LICENSE etc. file that is suitable. So we can skip this; though if you have any contact with upstream it'd be a good idea to ask them to ship at least a COPYING/LICENSE file. It looks like we now have things from Jason's review fixed like the build dep epoch, as well as things Andrew noticed. Jason also asked about a test suite, but taking a quick look at those files, they are not automated tests, but quick-launch interactive programs for developers. I don't see any other issues with this package, marking as reviewed. Jaroslav: now that Colin's given the go-ahead, I think you're at this stage of "becoming a Fedora contributor": http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#head-a601c13b0950a89568deafa65f505b4b58ee869b Hi. I have fedora-cvs on my computer. What now? (In reply to comment #15) > Hi. I have fedora-cvs on my computer. What now? Did you follow the "Import Your Package" step yet? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#head-3de96e1e7f6c4c9197e8beb02a0b3d7a5eb9dada Then you just check it out, cd to the devel branch, make tag and make build. You seem to be at the step right before that. Please read: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure You have set the fedora-cvs flag to ?, but haven't added a template from that page on what your cvs request is. :) New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: javahelp2 Short Description: JavaHelp is a full-featured, platform-independent, extensible help system Owners: jtulach Branches: F-9 InitialCC: fitzsim Cvsextras Commits: yes Thanks. cvs done. I shortened the Description to just "a full-featured, platform-independent, extensible help system" Since the name is already in the package name, no need to duplicate it. Jaroslav do you plan to build javahelp2 into koji soon? Resend5: Cannot proceed with JavaHelp
Od:Jaroslav Tulach
Komu: fedora-devel-java-list <fedora-devel-java-list>
Kopie: Andrew Overholt <overholt>, Dalibor Topic
<Dalibor.Topic>
Dne Saturday 24 May 2008 07:24:20 Jaroslav Tulach napsal(a):
> Dne Monday 19 May 2008 20:02:20 Jaroslav Tulach napsal(a):
> > Dne Monday 12 May 2008 20:48:07 Jaroslav Tulach napsal(a):
> > > Hello guys,
> > > I need help with fedora-cvs, it yields:
> > >
> > > Error: Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive).
> > > cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages
> > > if any)
> > >
> > > I guess that will be because missing .ssh directory, but when following
> > > the page
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join
> > > there was no instruction to create .ssh/id_dsa! Or is it there and I am
> > > just too blind to find it?
> >
> > Please advice.
> > -jst
Jaroslav: perhaps you missed it, but David told you what to do in an email: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2008-May/msg00026.html Yes, I have missed that advice. Thanks, but it is not enough, key is uploaded and still: ~/src$ fedora-cvs javahelp2 Checking out javahelp2 from fedora cvs: Error: Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive). cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages if any) $ ll ~/.ssh/ total 24 -r-------- 1 jarda jarda 1675 2008-05-03 11:46 id_rsa -rw-r--r-- 1 jarda jarda 409 2008-05-03 11:46 id_rsa.pub -rw-r--r-- 1 jarda jarda 246 2008-05-03 10:30 known_hosts ssh -v to your fedorapeople account and paste the output here I've connected to fedorepeople and I've also just got the CVS. Looks like there was some delay between getting the key and being able to use it. Now I think I will proceed with the upload. Created attachment 308671 [details]
Commited, what next?
Jaroslav: Looks like you are at this step: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Request_Builds I am going to clear the cvs flag here as CVS is done. I built this into Rawhide. Let's target Fedora 10 for NetBeans. |