Bug 541589

0.) The -javadoc subpackage should requires jpackage-utils
...that owns %_javadocdir

1.) Does not build
you probably meant to add junit4 to the classpath

2.) You don't use macros consistently
please use either $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot} macro but not both

The rest is just matter of clean style. Just for your considerations, probably nothing that would block the review:

You can do this in one shot, without calling rm:
-find -name '*.class' -exec rm -f '{}' \;
-find -name '*.jar' -exec rm -f '{}' \;
+find \( -name '*.class' -o -name '*.jar' \) -delete

3.) You do not run the test suite
Please do so, ideally in %check section. Seems like you'd need to add a dependency on hamcrest.

I'd also suggest replacing Summary with something more descriptive, (i.e. adding "database library" at the end or something like that).

The rest looks well
* Named and versioned in accordance with guidelines
* License ok, license tag correct, license present in package documentation
* spec file clean and legible
* filelist sane

(In reply to comment #1)
> 0.) The -javadoc subpackage should requires jpackage-utils
> ...that owns %_javadocdir
Fixed.

> 
> 1.) Does not build
> you probably meant to add junit4 to the classpath
Fixed.
> 
> 2.) You don't use macros consistently
> please use either $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot} macro but not both
Fixed.

> 
> The rest is just matter of clean style. Just for your considerations, probably
> nothing that would block the review:
> 
> You can do this in one shot, without calling rm:
> -find -name '*.class' -exec rm -f '{}' \;
> -find -name '*.jar' -exec rm -f '{}' \;
> +find \( -name '*.class' -o -name '*.jar' \) -delete  
Fixed. 

(In reply to comment #2)
> 3.) You do not run the test suite
> Please do so, ideally in %check section. Seems like you'd need to add a
> dependency on hamcrest.
Test suite is failing for me and upstream build is a nightmare. I've submitted a few issues about that but no response yet. Hopefully this is not a blocker.

> 
> I'd also suggest replacing Summary with something more descriptive, (i.e.
> adding "database library" at the end or something like that).
Hmm, I'm not sure I understand what you want. I picked the first paragraph of sqljet.com assuming upstream devs will describe their work best.

> 
> The rest looks well
> * Named and versioned in accordance with guidelines
> * License ok, license tag correct, license present in package documentation
> * spec file clean and legible
> * filelist sane  

New package:
Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/sqljet.spec
SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/sqljet-1.0.1-2.fc12.src.rpm

Koji build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1837449

Thanks for the fixes.

(In reply to comment #3)

> (In reply to comment #2)
> > 3.) You do not run the test suite
> > Please do so, ideally in %check section. Seems like you'd need to add a
> > dependency on hamcrest.
> Test suite is failing for me and upstream build is a nightmare. I've submitted
> a few issues about that but no response yet. Hopefully this is not a blocker.

Sounds fair.

> > I'd also suggest replacing Summary with something more descriptive, (i.e.
> > adding "database library" at the end or something like that).
> Hmm, I'm not sure I understand what you want. I picked the first paragraph of
> sqljet.com assuming upstream devs will describe their work best.

That was just a suggestion, feel free to keep your Summary if you feel it's better; definitely not a blocker or anything.

APPROVED.

Thanks for the review.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: sqljet
Short Description: Pure Java SQLite
Owners: akurtakov
Branches: 
InitialCC:

cvs done.

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=144190