Fedora Merge Review: avalon-framework http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/avalon-framework/
Please review spec file and srpm at: https://pcheung.108.redhat.com/files/documents/174/275/avalon-framework.spec https://pcheung.108.redhat.com/files/documents/174/276/avalon-framework-4.1.4-2jpp.14.src.rpm
MUST: * package is named appropriately - match upstream tarball or project name - try to match previous incarnations in other distributions/packagers for consistency - specfile should be %{name}.spec - non-numeric characters should only be used in Release (ie. cvs or something) - for non-numerics (pre-release, CVS snapshots, etc.), see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PackageRelease - if case sensitivity is requested by upstream or you feel it should be not just lowercase, do so; otherwise, use all lower case for the name OK * is it legal for Fedora to distribute this? - OSI-approved - not a kernel module - not shareware - is it covered by patents? - it *probably* shouldn't be an emulator - no binary firmware OK * license field matches the actual license. OK * license is open source-compatible. OK * specfile name matches %{name} OK * verify source and patches (md5sum matches upstream, know what the patches do) - if upstream doesn't release source drops, put *clear* instructions on how to generate the the source drop; ie. # svn export blah/tag blah # tar cjf blah-version-src.tar.bz2 blah OK, md5sums match * skim the summary and description for typos, etc. OK, Looks good to me * correct buildroot - should be: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) OK * if %{?dist} is used, it should be in that form (note the ? and % locations) OK, must be present since a jpp package * license text included in package and marked with %doc OK, LICENSE.txt and README.txt present, not entirely sure why KEYS (gpg keys) are present * keep old changelog entries; use judgement when removing (too old? useless?) OK * packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) OK, installs jars, javadocs and files into proper locations * rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output - justify warnings if you think they shouldn't be there rpmlint avalon-framework-4.1.4-2jpp.14.fc7.src.rpm W: avalon-framework non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Application Frameworks This group warning can be ignored * changelog should be in proper format OK * Packager tag should not be used OK * Vendor tag should not be used OK * Distribution tag should not be used OK * use License and not Copyright OK * Summary tag should not end in a period OK * if possible, replace PreReq with Requires(pre) and/or Requires(post) OK * specfile is legible - this is largely subjective; use your judgement OK, looks good to me * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86 OK * BuildRequires are proper - builds in mock will flush out problems here - the following packages don't need to be listed in BuildRequires: bash bzip2 coreutils cpio diffutils fedora-release (and/or redhat-release) gcc gcc-c++ gzip make patch perl redhat-rpm-config rpm-build sed X sed is listed as a BR tar unzip which * summary should be a short and concise description of the package Looks good to me * description expands upon summary (don't include installation instructions) Looks good to me * make sure description lines are <= 80 characters OK * specfile written in American English OK * make a -doc sub-package if necessary - see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-9bbfa57478f0460c6160947a6bf795249488182b OK, contains a javadoc and manual sub-projects * packages including libraries should exclude static libraries if possible OK * don't use rpath OK * config files should usually be marked with %config(noreplace) I don't believe it contains any conf files * GUI apps should contain .desktop files OK, Not a gui app * should the package contain a -devel sub-package? OK, I don't believe it should * use macros appropriately and consistently - ie. %{buildroot} and %{optflags} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS OK * don't use %makeinstall OK * locale data handling correct (find_lang) - if translations included, add BR: gettext and use %find_lang %{name} at the end of %install * consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps OK * split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines * package should probably not be relocatable * package contains code - see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#CodeVsContent - in general, there should be no offensive content OK * package should own all directories and files OK * there should be no %files duplicates OK * file permissions should be okay; %defattrs should be present OK * %clean should be present OK * %doc files should not affect runtime OK * if it is a web apps, it should be in /usr/share/%{name} and *not* /var/www * verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs * run rpmlint on the binary RPMs rpmlint avalon-framework-4.1.4-2jpp.14.i386.rpm W: avalon-framework non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Application Frameworks W: avalon-framework incoherent-version-in-changelog 0:4.1.4-2jpp.14.fc7 0:4.1.4-2jpp.14 X the change log probably shouldn't hardcode the dist (I don't think including the dist in the change log is even needed) rpmlint avalon-framework-manual-4.1.4-2jpp.14.i386.rpm W: avalon-framework-manual non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Application Frameworks OK (can ignore group warnings) rpmlint avalon-framework-javadoc-4.1.4-2jpp.14.i386.rpm W: avalon-framework-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation W: avalon-framework-javadoc dangerous-command-in-%post rm W: avalon-framework-javadoc dangerous-command-in-%postun rm X please remove rm from the javadoc post and postun SHOULD: * package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc OK * package should build on i386 OK * package should build in mock OK
(In reply to comment #2) ... > sed > X sed is listed as a BR Got rid of it > * run rpmlint on the binary RPMs > > rpmlint avalon-framework-4.1.4-2jpp.14.i386.rpm > W: avalon-framework non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Application Frameworks > W: avalon-framework incoherent-version-in-changelog 0:4.1.4-2jpp.14.fc7 > 0:4.1.4-2jpp.14 > X the change log probably shouldn't hardcode the dist (I don't think including > the dist in the change log is even needed) Done > rpmlint avalon-framework-javadoc-4.1.4-2jpp.14.i386.rpm > W: avalon-framework-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation > W: avalon-framework-javadoc dangerous-command-in-%post rm > W: avalon-framework-javadoc dangerous-command-in-%postun rm > X please remove rm from the javadoc post and postun Done Changes had been committed into cvs.
Approved
Package built into brew.