Bug 589617
Summary: | Review Request: apache-commons-discovery - rename of jakarta-commons-discovery | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotni> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | akurtako, fedora-package-review, lkundrak, mat.booth, notting |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | akurtako:
fedora-review+
gwync: 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: | 2010-05-11 07:36:08 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: | 589168 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 588764 |
Description
Stanislav Ochotnicky
2010-05-06 14:58:12 UTC
Adding bug #589168 as blocker because this package contains Requires on apache-commons-logging. Fixed provides to not self-deprecate self. Spec URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/apache-commons-discovery.spec SRPM URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/apache-commons-discovery-0.4-2.fc12.src.rpm Also any reviewer should note that this is a re-review of existing package named jakarta-commons-discovery. *-javadoc subpackage must require owner of %{_javadocdir}, e.g. jpackage-utils. Also, I dont think that you should mark %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version} and %{_javadocdir}/%{name} as %dir explicitly. Thanks for comments. > -javadoc subpackage must require owner of %{_javadocdir}, e.g. jpackage-utils. I fixed this but I will wait a bit before creating another revision in case something else comes up. I also noticed your question about javadoc requires on their parents on fedora-devel. Once that will be cleared up I will create new version of spec/srpm. > Also, I dont think that you should mark %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version} and > %{_javadocdir}/%{name} as %dir explicitly. I am sorry, but as far as I see I named them using %doc not %dir. Is this wrong? I was told %doc is optional in this case but it will not hurt anything. (In reply to comment #4) > I am sorry, but as far as I see I named them using %doc not %dir. Is this > wrong? I was told %doc is optional in this case but it will not hurt anything. You're right - I was wrong here, so, please, disregard this particular objection. I'm taking this one. Review: OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. OUTPUT: apache-commons-discovery.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Pluggable -> Plug gable, Plug-gable, Plugged apache-commons-discovery.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lifecycle -> life cycle, life-cycle, lifestyle Not a problem. OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines . OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines . OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK: The spec file must be written in American English. OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. OK: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK: Each package must consistently use macros. OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content. OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. Javadocs subpackage. OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. OK: Package is correctly Obsoleting/Providing the package it's replacing. You don't need the %global section free line - it's of no use. This package is APPROVED. P.S. Please make the changes asked from Peter. I assumed them for fixed. For future reference only: Spec URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/apache-commons-discovery.spec SRPM URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/apache-commons-discovery-0.4-3.fc12.src.rpm Thanks. Requesting CVS: New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: apache-commons-discovery Short Description: Apache Commons Discovery Owners: sochotni Branches: InitialCC: CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). Remember to assign the review to the reviewer. Package build finished in koji. Closing. Thanks all Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: apache-commons-discovery New Branches: epel7 Owners: lkundrak Requesting an EPEL branch, maintainer agrees to this and is not willing to maintain the branch himself. Git done (by process-git-requests). |