Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/lucene3/1/lucene3.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/lucene3/1/lucene3-3.6.2-1.fc20.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: goldmann Description: Apache Lucene is a high-performance, full-featured text search engine library written entirely in Java. It is a technology suitable for nearly any application that requires full-text search, especially cross-platform. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6740272 Background: This is a compat package required to build infinispan. The latest version of lucene (4.7.1) is not sufficient to build infinispan. Infinispan provides modules for lucene v3 and v4, but in order to build lucene module v4, v3 is required. This is why we need lucene3 package: to build the lucene v3 integration module of infinispan and satisfy the v4 requirement. This package contains only lucene-core.jar, which is required by infinispan.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. Note: These BR are not needed: unzip See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 - This seems like a Java package, please install fedora-review-plugin-java to get additional checks ===== 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. [!]: 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", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Apache (v2.0) BSD (3 clause)", "Apache (v2.0) BSD (2 clause)", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 94 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1087823-lucene3/licensecheck.txt [!]: 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 [x]: 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. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 317440 bytes in 4 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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]: 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]: 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]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in lucene3-javadoc [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %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 is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: lucene3-3.6.2-1.fc21.noarch.rpm lucene3-javadoc-3.6.2-1.fc21.noarch.rpm lucene3-3.6.2-1.fc21.src.rpm lucene3.src: W: invalid-url Source4: dev-tools.tar.xz 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint lucene3-javadoc lucene3 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- lucene3-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils lucene3 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils Provides -------- lucene3-javadoc: lucene3-javadoc lucene3: lucene3 mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-core:3) mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-core:3.6.2) mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-parent) mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-parent:pom:3) mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-parent:pom:3.6.2) mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-solr-grandparent) mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-solr-grandparent:pom:3) mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-solr-grandparent:pom:3.6.2) osgi(org.apache.lucene.core) Source checksums ---------------- https://archive.apache.org/dist/lucene/java/3.6.2/lucene-3.6.2-src.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 984bf1e82e32ecdc6c4ff7f582b5bd0a4c2bf68acd1d48bf6df74ad86c97ca8c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 984bf1e82e32ecdc6c4ff7f582b5bd0a4c2bf68acd1d48bf6df74ad86c97ca8c Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1087823 -m fedora-rawhide-i386 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Java Disabled plugins: C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
Issues: ======= - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. Note: These BR are not needed: unzip See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 Please ,remove this BR [?]: 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", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Apache (v2.0) BSD (3 clause)", "Apache (v2.0) BSD (2 clause)", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 94 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1087823-lucene3/licensecheck.txt If in a second time this package should provides other libraries, should be update license field [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. Please, install license also in javadoc sub package [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. Please, use (e.g.) install -pm 0644 dev-tools/maven/lucene/core/pom.xml.template $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_mavenpomdir}/JPP.%{name}-lucene-core.pom Please fix these problems before import time
Created attachment 886490 [details] licensecheck
Thank you! I'll fix these. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: lucene3 Short Description: High-performance, full-featured text search engine Owners: goldmann
Git done (by process-git-requests).