Hide Forgot
Fedora Merge Review: postgresql-jdbc http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/postgresql-jdbc/ Initial Owner: tgl@redhat.com
Hi. I was just wondering if there was any particular reason the JDBC4 driver isn't being shipped with Fedora yet? I needed the SQL Array support, so I downloaded the upstream JDBC4 driver from the jdbc.postgresql.org site (which says "If you are using the 1.6 JVM, then you should use the JDBC4 version"), and it seems to work great for me under OpenJDK from Fedora 11.
AFAIK postgresql-jdbc.jar is a perfectly good JDBC4 driver, or at least it has as much JDBC4 support as is available from upstream. It is not my intention to ship a postgresql-jdbc4.jar symlink, unless someone explains to me why one is needed.
I would do this one. Initial comments based on getting a smaller spec for the official review: * would you please drop gcj_support from the spec to remove a good number of lines :) * Requires(post|postun): jpackage-utils and %post/postun %update_maven_depmap are no longer needed on F15+ * empty "export CLASSPATH=" line can be removed * rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} in %install and %clean section can be removed in modern fedoras * %add_to_maven_depmap postgresql postgresql %{version} JPP postgresql-jdbc should become %add_maven_depmap JPP-postgresql-jdbc.pom %{name}.jar - it's quite more simple and detects groupId:artifactId automatically * %defattr(-,root,root) is no longer needed * there is no need in installing %{_javadir}/%{name}-%{version}.jar as per java guidelines %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar should be the default and versioned one is not needed * ant jar publicapi should be called and javadoc subpackage should be installed * BuildRoot definition can be safely removed Once these are done I'll do the official review. Or if you want I can do the changes and commit them push a new build - they shouldn't take more than 10 mins.
Mass reassigning all merge reviews to their component. For more details, see this FESCO ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1269 If you don't know what merge reviews are about, please see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Merge_Reviews How to handle this bug is left to the discretion of the package maintainer.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 23 development cycle. Changing version to '23'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 23 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 23 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora23
This message is a reminder that Fedora 23 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 23. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '23'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 23 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Alex, as you are the only one commenting the package, I'm just curious whether you aren't interested in package review? There has happened a lot during last ~2years, and review would be appreciated. Otherwise, I would close this "WONTFIX" and anybody would be free to re-open later.
Please close, I don't have time for this now.
The package looks to be in reasonable shape, but if there was volunteer for review - feel free to reopen. Thanks.