Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 227044
Review Request: checkstyle-4.1-3jpp - Java source code checker
Last modified: 2014-12-01 18:13:42 EST
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/rafaels/specs/checkstyle-4.1-3jpp.spec SRPM URL: ftp://jpackage.hmdc.harvard.edu/JPackage/1.7/generic/SRPMS.free/checkstyle-4.1-3jpp.src.rpm Description: A tool for checking Java source code for adherence to a set of rules. Demonstrations and samples for checkstyle. Javadoc for checkstyle. Manual for checkstyle. Optional functionality for checkstyle.
Fixed spec and srpm: http://people.redhat.com/dbhole/fedora/checkstyle/checkstyle.spec http://people.redhat.com/dbhole/fedora/checkstyle/checkstyle-4.1-4jpp.1.fc7.src.rpm Some lines are > 80 characters. Most of them are file names, so they cannot broken. There is also one perl command which extends to > 80 which I did not break because I think it looks cleaner on one line.
MUST: * package is named appropriately * it is legal for Fedora to distribute this * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * specfile name matches %{name} * verify source and patches * skim the summary and description for typos, etc. * correct buildroot * %{?dist} used properly * license text included in package and marked with %doc * packages meet FHS X rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output $ rpmlint checkstyle-4.1-4jpp.1.fc7.src.rpm W: checkstyle non-standard-group Development/Build Tools Let's make this Development/Tools * changelog fine * Packager tag not used * Vendor tag not used * Distribution tag not used * License used and not Copyright * Summary tag should not end in a period * no PreReq * specfile is legible X package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86 /usr/bin/build-classpath: error: Could not find excalibur/avalon-logkit Java extension for this JVM /usr/bin/build-classpath: error: Some specified jars were not found I removed this to make it build * BuildRequires are proper * summary fine * description fine * make sure lines are <= 80 characters . I'm fine with the ones that aren't * specfile written in American English * no -doc sub-package necessary * no libraries * no rpath * no config files * not a GUI app * no -devel sub-package necessary * macros used appropriately and consistently * %makeinstall not used * no locale data * cp -p used * split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines * package not relocatable * package contains code * package owns all directories and files * no %files duplicates * file permissions okay; %defattrs present * %clean present * %doc files do not affect runtime * not a web app * verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs W: checkstyle non-standard-group Development/Build Tools W: checkstyle-demo non-standard-group Development/Build Tools These are fine but let's just make it Development/Tools W: checkstyle-demo no-documentation This is fine if there's nothing in the upstream sources E: checkstyle-javadoc zero-length /usr/share/javadoc/checkstyle-4.1/package-list Hmm, this should be fixed. W: checkstyle-manual dangling-symlink /usr/share/doc/checkstyle-manual-4.1/api /usr/share/javadoc/checkstyle This should also be fixed. W: checkstyle-manual symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/doc/checkstyle-manual-4.1/api /usr/share/javadoc/checkstyle This too W: checkstyle-optional non-standard-group Development/Build Tools See above. W: checkstyle-optional no-documentation Fine.
FYI, it builds in mock for me.
I: - fixed the groups - removed excalibur-avalon-logkit dependency (it seems spurious) - fixed the dangling symlinks issue - removed an rm -rf in %install that shouldn't have been there to begin with Fixed spec and srpm: http://people.redhat.com/dbhole/fedora/checkstyle/checkstyle.spec http://people.redhat.com/dbhole/fedora/checkstyle/checkstyle-4.1-4jpp.1.fc7.src.rpm
APPROVED! Thanks, Deepak.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: checkstyle Short Description: Java source code checker Owners: nsantos@redhat.com Branches: devel InitialCC: rafaels@redhat.com,dbhole@redhat.com
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: checkstyle New Branches: EL-5 Updated EPEL Owners: rob.myers@gtri.gatech.edu rob myers wrote: > I'd like to have eclipse-checkstyle available in EPEL5. Of course that > requires checkstyle to be in EPEL5. Are you interested in EPEL? If you > are not interested in EPEL I would be willing to become a co-maintainer > of these packages for the purposes of EPEL5 support. Hi Rob, due to my main project workload, I probably will not be able to assist with packaging for EPEL, so if you're willing to be a co-maintainer I'd appreciate it. The last link below doesn't have a lot of details, so please let me know what steps I need to take (if any) to make you a co-maintainer. Thanks, Nuno
branch done. Per the above template I branched for EL-5 and made Rob the maintainer there.