Spec URL: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers.spec SRPM URL: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers-0.23-2.fc21.src.rpm Description: Additional kryo (http://kryo.googlecode.com) serializers for standard JDK types (e.g. currency, JDK proxies) and some for external libraries (e.g. JODA TIME, CGLIB proxies). Fedora Account System Username: tstclair
Here are my notes, please comment if you find an issue. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/tstclair/work/spaces/tachyon /kryo-serializers-rpm/review-kryo-serializers/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [?]: Package does not generate any conflict. [-]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Java: [x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It is pulled in by maven-local [x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage [x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils [x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink) [x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Maven: [ ]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant [x]: Pom files have correct Maven mapping [x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging [x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used [x]: Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage- utils for %update_maven_depmap macro [x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun [x]: Packages use %{_mavenpomdir} instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in kryo- serializers-javadoc [ ]: Package functions as described. [ ]: Latest version is packaged. [ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Java: [ ]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) [x]: Packages are noarch unless they use JNI ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: kryo-serializers-0.23-2.fc21.noarch.rpm kryo-serializers-javadoc-0.23-2.fc21.noarch.rpm kryo-serializers-0.23-2.fc21.src.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint kryo-serializers-javadoc kryo-serializers 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- kryo-serializers-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils kryo-serializers (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils mvn(cglib:cglib) mvn(com.esotericsoftware.kryo:kryo) mvn(joda-time:joda-time) Provides -------- kryo-serializers-javadoc: kryo-serializers-javadoc kryo-serializers: kryo-serializers mvn(de.javakaffee:kryo-serializers) osgi(de.javakaffee.kryo-serializers) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/magro/kryo-serializers/archive/kryo-serializers-0.23.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 290cd93d93e3f47634c9ece9069ef927d57244e714d351fd374ae3053df9dc9c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 290cd93d93e3f47634c9ece9069ef927d57244e714d351fd374ae3053df9dc9c Generated by fedora-review 0.5.0 (920221d) last change: 2013-08-30 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -n kryo-serializers Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Java Disabled plugins: C/C++, Python, SugarActivity, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EPEL5, EXARCH, DISTTAG
i would like to take this review
Created attachment 809018 [details] review notes This is a problem: src/test/java/de/javakaffee/kryoserializers/cglib/CustomClassLoader.java [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1016294-kryo- serializers/licensecheck.txt [!]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. reports this * $Id$ * (c) Copyright 2009 freiheit.com technologies GmbH * * Created on Jun 25, 2010 by Martin Grotzke (martin.grotzke) * * This file contains unpublished, proprietary trade secret information of * freiheit.com technologies GmbH. Use, transcription, duplication and * modification are strictly prohibited without prior written consent of * freiheit.com technologies GmbH. please, remove form taraball, also before import in SCM
Issue files upstream and tracking: https://github.com/magro/kryo-serializers/issues/16
Issue filed upstream and tracking: https://github.com/magro/kryo-serializers/issues/16
Pruned non-compliant files from src.tar.gz Updated spec: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers.spec Updated srpm: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers-0.23-3.fc21.src.rpm
Issues: ======= - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/gil/1016294-kryo- serializers/diff.txt See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL please, (rename source archive e.g. kryo-serializers-0.23-clean.tar.xz) and/or dont use source url (https://github.com/magro/kryo-serializers/archive/)
e.g. add these comments # wget https://github.com/magro/%{name}/archive/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz # tar -xf %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz # remove non free contents # rm -rf %{name}-%{name}-%{version}/src/test/java/de/javakaffee/kryoserializers/cglib/CustomClassLoader.java # tar cJf %{name}-%{version}-clean.tar.xz %{name}-%{name}-%{version} Source0: %{name}-%{version}-clean.tar.xz
Added a generate-tarball.sh, updated Source0, and added comments to make it clear. Updated spec: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers.spec Update srpm: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers-0.23-4.fc21.src.rpm
Created attachment 809555 [details] review notes approved
I just released kryo-serializers 0.26 that includes the fix for the noncompliant license header. FYI, kryo-serializers 0.25+ uses / depends on kryo 2.22 which provides a shaded jar as main artifact. That means that kryo-serializers should no longer need the following build deps: BuildRequires: mvn(asm:asm) BuildRequires: mvn(com.esotericsoftware.minlog:minlog) BuildRequires: mvn(com.esotericsoftware.reflectasm:reflectasm) BuildRequires: mvn(org.objenesis:objenesis) Btw, why are these BuildRequires specified explicitely in the kryo-serializers.spec? Shouldn't they be pulled in by the BuildRequires on kryo automatically?
(In reply to Martin Grotzke from comment #11) > I just released kryo-serializers 0.26 that includes the fix for the > noncompliant license header. > > FYI, kryo-serializers 0.25+ uses / depends on kryo 2.22 which provides a > shaded jar as main artifact. That means that kryo-serializers should no > longer need the following build deps: > BuildRequires: mvn(asm:asm) > BuildRequires: mvn(com.esotericsoftware.minlog:minlog) > BuildRequires: mvn(com.esotericsoftware.reflectasm:reflectasm) > BuildRequires: mvn(org.objenesis:objenesis) > > Btw, why are these BuildRequires specified explicitely in the > kryo-serializers.spec? Shouldn't they be pulled in by the BuildRequires on > kryo automatically? these apis should be copy in kryo JAR plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-shade-plugin</artifactId> <version>1.7</version> <configuration> <shadedArtifactAttached>true</shadedArtifactAttached> <shadedClassifierName>shaded</shadedClassifierName> <artifactSet> <includes> <include>com.esotericsoftware.reflectasm:reflectasm:shaded</include> <include>com.esotericsoftware.minlog:minlog</include> <include>org.objenesis:objenesis</include> </includes> </artifactSet> <relocations> <relocation> <pattern>org.objenesis</pattern> <shadedPattern>com.esotericsoftware.shaded.org.objenesis</shadedPattern> </relocation> </relocations> </configuration> <executions> <execution> <phase>package</phase> <goals> <goal>shade</goal> </goals> </execution> </executions> </plugin> but is not possible to do this for us [1] 1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
@ Timothy, please, update to 2.26
Removed Spec modifications listed from previous comments and updated to 0.26 spec: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers.spec srpm: http://tstclair.fedorapeople.org/tachyon/kryo-serializers/kryo-serializers-0.26-1.fc21.src.rpm
Created attachment 810197 [details] review notes approved
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: kryo-serializers Short Description: Additional kryo for standard JDK types Owners: tstclair Branches: f20, rawhide InitialCC: java-sig
Git done (by process-git-requests). Don't request rawhide/devel, it's automatic.