Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/thymeleaf.spec SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/thymeleaf-2.1.4-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Thymeleaf is a Java library. It is an XML/XHTML/HTML5 template engine (extensible to other formats) that can work both in web and non-web environments. It is better suited for serving XHTML/HTML5 at the view layer of web applications, but it can process any XML file even in offline environments. Fedora Account System Username: gil
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - There are bundled DTD, I think some of them could be replaced with system versions that are part of Fedora packages - Some of the DTDs are modified and probably cannot be unbundled. The license tag needs to reflect this. License: ASL 2.0 and W3C ===== 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". 56 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/msimacek/reviews/1199840-thymeleaf/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: 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. [x]: 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. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. Note: Test run failed [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Test run failed [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Note: Test run failed [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]: 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]: 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. Java: [x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Note: Test run failed [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) Maven: [x]: 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 DO 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: [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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in thymeleaf- javadoc [?]: 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]: 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. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: 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. Java: [x]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) [x]: Packages are noarch unless they use JNI ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Test run failed [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: thymeleaf-2.1.4-1.fc23.noarch.rpm thymeleaf-javadoc-2.1.4-1.fc23.noarch.rpm thymeleaf-2.1.4-1.fc23.src.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Requires -------- thymeleaf (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): java-headless jpackage-utils mvn(org.apache.commons:commons-ognl) mvn(org.javassist:javassist) mvn(org.slf4j:slf4j-api) mvn(org.unbescape:unbescape) thymeleaf-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils Provides -------- thymeleaf: mvn(org.thymeleaf:thymeleaf) mvn(org.thymeleaf:thymeleaf:pom:) thymeleaf thymeleaf-javadoc: thymeleaf-javadoc Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/thymeleaf/thymeleaf/archive/thymeleaf-2.1.4.RELEASE.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 70d2e784d959ccef6dcbc71055fcde698e38eb0f028a932dac4da9fba63fbf18 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 70d2e784d959ccef6dcbc71055fcde698e38eb0f028a932dac4da9fba63fbf18 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1199840 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 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
Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/thymeleaf.spec SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/thymeleaf-2.1.4-2.fc20.src.rpm - fix license tag - remove bundled xhtml1-dtds
Created attachment 1004701 [details] test failed with system xhtml1-dtds support
Created attachment 1004702 [details] test without system xhtml1-dtds
Bundling exception for Thymeleaf (DTDs) @ https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/516
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #5) > Bundling exception for Thymeleaf (DTDs) @ > https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/516 was accepted
Good. The W3C software license [1] requires the license text to be distributed along the software, so it should be included as additional source. [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231
(In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #7) > Good. The W3C software license [1] requires the license text to be > distributed along the software, so it should be included as additional > source. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231 I did not find any license file in txt format. any idea how I could get it or just copy the page you indicated?
Created attachment 1008313 [details] W3C license
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #8) > (In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #7) > > Good. The W3C software license [1] requires the license text to be > > distributed along the software, so it should be included as additional > > source. > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231 > > I did not find any license file in txt format. any idea how I could get it > or just copy the page you indicated? Just copy it and include a link to the page you copied it from
(In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #10) > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #8) > > (In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #7) > > > Good. The W3C software license [1] requires the license text to be > > > distributed along the software, so it should be included as additional > > > source. > > > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231 > > > > I did not find any license file in txt format. any idea how I could get it > > or just copy the page you indicated? > > Just copy it and include a link to the page you copied it from as in the attached file? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1008313&action=diff
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #11) > (In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #10) > > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #8) > > > (In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #7) > > > > Good. The W3C software license [1] requires the license text to be > > > > distributed along the software, so it should be included as additional > > > > source. > > > > > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231 > > > > > > I did not find any license file in txt format. any idea how I could get it > > > or just copy the page you indicated? > > > > Just copy it and include a link to the page you copied it from > > as in the attached file? > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1008313&action=diff yes
Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/thymeleaf.spec SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/thymeleaf-2.1.4-3.fc20.src.rpm - add W3C license
Please just add a comment above the source with the link to the license page you took the text from. You can do it during the import. APPROVED
Sure! Thanks! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: thymeleaf Short Description: XML/XHTML/HTML5 template engine for Java Upstream URL: http://www.thymeleaf.org/ Owners: gil Branches: f22 InitialCC: java-sig
Git done (by process-git-requests).
thymeleaf-2.1.4-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/thymeleaf-2.1.4-3.fc22
thymeleaf-2.1.4-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository.
thymeleaf-2.1.4-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.