Bug 500246
| Summary: | Pre-Review Request: plexus-classworlds - Plexus Classworlds Classloader Framework | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Fernando Nasser <fnasser> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Andrew Overholt <overholt> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, notting, overholt, tcallawa |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | overholt:
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: | 2009-08-20 15:23:59 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: | 429551 | ||
|
Description
Fernando Nasser
2009-05-11 21:56:35 UTC
- I think the license field should be ASL 2.0 and not "Apache Software License 2.0" but see my last comment - there are 3 source files (plexus-classworlds-1.2-build.xml, plexus-classworlds-settings.xml, plexus-classworlds-1.2-jpp-depmap.xml) that do not have URLs - the md5sums of the tarball that's in the SRPM and the one that I generate are not equal but a recursive diff of the exploded contents shows not differences so I assume timestamps are the issue - I don't know what license this is. spot, can you please take a look? http://overholt.fedorapeople.org/plexus-classworlds-license.txt This package's naming is in violation of the Fedora Packaging Guidelines. Please see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/JPackagePolicy Basically, the "jpp" tag needs to be removed. Nevermind, looks like it is removed from the spec, but somehow made it into the SRPM... weird. I don't see naming guidelines on: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Toshio/Pre-review_Guidelines Yeah, they're not there for this "pre-review", but it is worth pointing out that it would cause an issue at final review. If the issue was there, which it doesn't seem to be. I'm not sure how the SRPM ended up with the "jpp" tag when the spec inside it doesn't have it. Any comment about the license, spot? So, on an initial look, it looks like an Apache 1.1 derived license. I'm waiting on Red Hat Legal for some final details before I can properly answer. License is free, but GPL incompatible. For this package, use: License: ASL 2.0 and Plexus The 3 files plexus-classworlds-1.2-build.xml, plexus-classworlds-settings.xml, plexus-classworlds-1.2-jpp-depmap.xml are written for this RPM so they have no upstream URL (only needed for the rpmbuild). As for the license, I guess it has to be changed for all plexus-* RPMs, so we will have to recreate/reupload all plexus-* srpms. P.S.: The dist tag expands to different things depending on where you run rpmbuild, so it will take its desired value when rebuilt in Koji. Regards! Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/plexus-classworlds.spec http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/plexus-classworlds-1.2-0.a9.6.jpp6.src.rpm Have the new license specification. Thanks! Thanks, Fernando. I'd still like to see some comments about the XML source files stating that they're only for building but that's a Review thing :) I'm okay with the latest SRPM for pre-review. I'm going to set the review flag but someone please change it if that is incorrect. Requested CVS. Can you add a cvs template here so I know what you need? Reset the cvs flag when ready. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: plexus-classworlds Short Description: Plexus Classworlds Classloader Framework Owners: fnasser, dbhole Branches: devel InitialCC: jkeating cvs done. Built in rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1617781 (Full review was bug #518310) |