Bug 521069
| Summary: | Review Request: felix-osgi-obr - Felix OSGi OBR Service API | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako> |
| 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: | dwalluck, fedora-package-review, notting, overholt |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | overholt:
fedora-review+
dennis: 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: | 2009-09-04 13:47:17 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: | 521067 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 486360 | ||
|
Description
Alexander Kurtakov
2009-09-03 12:50:07 UTC
Only issue: line 42 is too long :) - md5sums match upstream - licensing fine - builds and installs fine - macros sane - naming good - files okay - rpmlint clean (maven warning is okay): $ rpmlint /home/overholt/rpmbuild/SRPMS/felix-osgi-obr-1.0.2-1.fc11.src.rpm /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/felix-osgi-obr-1.0.2-1.fc11.noarch.rpm /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/felix-osgi-obr-javadoc-1.0.2-1.fc11.noarch.rpm felix-osgi-obr.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/felix-osgi-obr 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. As I said in bug #521067, it may be best to coordinate with the JPackage folks to split their monolithic felix package like you've done so that there aren't file conflicts. At the moment, since Fedora doesn't explicitly support JPackage compatibility, this is probably okay. Longer term, it'd be nice to interoperate. (In reply to comment #1) > Only issue: line 42 is too long :) Fixed. > > - md5sums match upstream > - licensing fine > - builds and installs fine > - macros sane > - naming good > - files okay > - rpmlint clean (maven warning is okay): > > $ rpmlint /home/overholt/rpmbuild/SRPMS/felix-osgi-obr-1.0.2-1.fc11.src.rpm > /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/felix-osgi-obr-1.0.2-1.fc11.noarch.rpm > /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/felix-osgi-obr-javadoc-1.0.2-1.fc11.noarch.rpm > felix-osgi-obr.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc > /etc/maven/fragments/felix-osgi-obr > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > > As I said in bug #521067, it may be best to coordinate with the JPackage folks > to split their monolithic felix package like you've done so that there aren't > file conflicts. At the moment, since Fedora doesn't explicitly support > JPackage compatibility, this is probably okay. Longer term, it'd be nice to > interoperate. New sources: Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/felix-osgi-obr.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/felix-osgi-obr-1.0.2-2.fc11.src.rpm Thanks, approved. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: felix-osgi-obr Short Description: Felix OSGi OBR Service API Owners: akurtakov Branches: InitialCC: CVS Done Build in rawhide. |