Bug 227050 - Review Request: dtdparser-1.21-3jpp - A Java DTD Parser
Review Request: dtdparser-1.21-3jpp - A Java DTD Parser
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nuno Santos
Fedora Package Reviews List
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-02-02 12:33 EST by Rafael H. Schloming
Modified: 2014-12-01 18:13 EST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2007-04-12 11:25:21 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
viveklak: fedora‑review+
wtogami: fedora‑cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Rafael H. Schloming 2007-02-02 12:33:24 EST
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/rafaels/specs/dtdparser-1.21-3jpp.spec
SRPM URL: ftp://jpackage.hmdc.harvard.edu/JPackage/1.7/generic/SRPMS.free/dtdparser-1.21-3jpp.src.rpm
Description: DTD parsers for Java seem to be pretty scarce. That's probably because
DTD isn't valid XML. At some point, if/when XML Schema becomes widely
accepted, no one will need DTD parsers anymore. Until then, you can
use this library to parse a DTD.

Javadoc for dtdparser.
Comment 1 Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-02-12 16:25:21 EST
Taking up for initial review.
Comment 2 Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-02-12 17:26:49 EST
X suggests the subsection needs attention
+ is a positive comment
. is a specific comment about a problem

MUST:
X * package is named appropriately
   . 0:3.4.5-2jpp.1 -> 0:3.4.5-2jpp.2%{?dist} to be inline with 
     http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ExceptionJPackage
 - match upstream tarball or project name
   + MD5SUMs match
 - try to match previous incarnations in other distributions/packagers for
consistency
   + Consistent with JPackage

 - specfile should be %{name}.spec
   + OK
 - non-numeric characters should only be used in Release (ie. cvs or
   something)
   + OK
 - for non-numerics (pre-release, CVS snapshots, etc.), see
   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PackageRelease
   + N/A
 - 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
   + N/A

* is it legal for Fedora to distribute this?
 - OSI-approved
   + LGPL OK.

 - not a kernel module
 - not shareware
 - is it covered by patents?
 - it *probably* shouldn't be an emulator
 - no binary firmware
  + None of these apply

* license field matches the actual license.
  + OK

* license is open source-compatible.
 - use acronyms for licences where common
  + OK

* specfile name matches %{name}
  + OK

* verify source and patches (md5sum matches upstream, know what the patches do)
  + No patches, MD5 OK

 - 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
  + N/A

* skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
   + OK

X correct buildroot
 - should be:
   %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)

X if %{?dist} is used, it should be in that form (note the ? and %
locations)
  . See above about naming convention

* license text included in package and marked with %doc
  + OK

* keep old changelog entries; use judgement when removing (too old?
useless?)
  + N/A

* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
  + OK

X* rpmlint on <this package>.srpm and rpms gives no output
 - justify warnings if you think they shouldn't be there
W: dtdparser non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid.  Valid groups are:
"Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving",
"Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases",
"Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering",
"Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia",
"Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System",
"Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers",
"Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System",
"Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System
Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System
Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User
Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support".

 E: dtdparser tag-not-utf8 %changelog
The character encoding of the value of this tag is not UTF-8.
. use iconv to convert to UTF8

E: dtdparser non-utf8-spec-file dtdparser.spec
The character encoding of the spec file is not UTF-8.  Convert it for
example using iconv(1).
. use iconv to convert to UTF8

W: dtdparser mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 36)
The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a
cosmetic annoyance.  Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both.
. Replace the tabs with spaces (:set tabexpand :%retab in vim)

W: dtdparser non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid.  Valid groups are:
"Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving",
"Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases",
"Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering",
"Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia",
"Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System",
"Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers",
"Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System",
"Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System
Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System
Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User
Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support".

E: dtdparser tag-not-utf8 %changelog
The character encoding of the value of this tag is not UTF-8.
. use iconv to convert to UTF8

W: dtdparser-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid.  Valid groups are:
"Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving",
"Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases",
"Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering",
"Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia",
"Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System",
"Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers",
"Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System",
"Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System
Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System
Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User
Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support".
+ All group warnings can be ignored.

E: dtdparser-javadoc tag-not-utf8 %changelog
The character encoding of the value of this tag is not UTF-8.
. use iconv to convert to UTF8

E: dtdparser-javadoc zero-length
/usr/share/javadoc/dtdparser-1.21/package-list
 + I checked the build root on a local build and this seems to be created by
   the javadoc task in ant. This can probably be ignored?

* changelog should be in one of these formats:

  * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> - 0.6-4
  - And fix the link syntax.

  * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> 0.6-4
  - And fix the link syntax.

  * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com>
  - 0.6-4
  - And fix the link syntax.
  + OK

* Packager tag should not be used
  + OK
* Vendor and 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)
  + N/A
* specfile is legible
 - this is largely subjective; use your judgement
* package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86
* BuildRequires are proper
  + Seems OK, built on mock
 - builds in mock will flush out problems here
* summary should be a short and concise description of the package
  + OK
* description expands upon summary (don't include installation
instructions)
  + OK
X make sure lines are <= 80 characters
  . minor fixes needed

* specfile written in American English
  + OK
X make a -doc sub-package if necessary
  Standardize the javadoc package handling around
  https://zarb.org/pipermail/jpackage-discuss/2007-February/011119.html
 - see
  
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-9bbfa57478f0460c6160947a6bf795249488182b
* packages including libraries should exclude static libraries if possible
* don't use rpath
* config files should usually be marked with %config(noreplace)
* GUI apps should contain .desktop files
  + The above dont apply

* should the package contain a -devel sub-package?
  + N/A

* use macros appropriately and consistently
 - ie. %{buildroot} and %{optflags} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
  + RPM_BUILD_ROOT seems to be used consistently

* don't use %makeinstall
  + N/A

* locale data handling correct (find_lang)
 - if translations included, add BR: gettext and use %find_lang %{name} at the
   end of %install
 + N/A

* consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps
  + OK

* split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines
  + None used yet

* package should probably not be relocatable
  + Non relocatable

* package contains code
 - see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#CodeVsContent
 - in general, there should be no offensive content
  + OK
X* package should own all directories and files
 + Use jpackage-utils in Requires(x), Requires since installing to
%{_javadir}/%{_javadocdir} 
* there should be no %files duplicates
  + OK
* file permissions should be okay; %defattrs should be present
  + OK
* %clean should be present
  + OK
X* %doc files should not affect runtime
  . javadoc should use %doc for its files
* if it is a web apps, it should be in /usr/share/%{name} and *not* /var/www
  + Not a webapp
X* verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPM
rpm -qp --provides ../RPMS/noarch/dtdparser-*
dtdparser = 0:1.21-3jpp
dtdparser-javadoc = 0:1.21-3jpp
rpm -qp --requires ../RPMS/noarch/dtdparser-*
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
 . Requires needs jpakage-utils as mentioned earlier
 . Should have a requires on java?

SHOULD:
* package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc
  + OK
* package should build on i386
  + Builds on mock

* package should build in mock
  + OK
Comment 3 Tania Bento 2007-02-14 10:50:12 EST
> X * package is named appropriately
>    . 0:3.4.5-2jpp.1 -> 0:3.4.5-2jpp.2%{?dist} to be inline with 
>      http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ExceptionJPackage

Fixed.

> X correct buildroot
>  - should be:
>    %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)

Fixed.


> X if %{?dist} is used, it should be in that form (note the ? and %
> locations)
>   . See above about naming convention

Fixed
 
> X* rpmlint on <this package>.srpm and rpms gives no output
>  - justify warnings if you think they shouldn't be there
> W: dtdparser non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
> The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid.  Valid groups are:
> "Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving",
> "Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases",
> "Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering",
> "Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia",
> "Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System",
> "Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers",
> "Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System",
> "Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System
> Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System
> Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User
> Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support".

This warning can be ignored.

>  E: dtdparser tag-not-utf8 %changelog
> The character encoding of the value of this tag is not UTF-8.
> . use iconv to convert to UTF8

Fixed.

> E: dtdparser non-utf8-spec-file dtdparser.spec
> The character encoding of the spec file is not UTF-8.  Convert it for
> example using iconv(1).
> . use iconv to convert to UTF8

Fixed.

> W: dtdparser mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 36)
> The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a
> cosmetic annoyance.  Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both.
> . Replace the tabs with spaces (:set tabexpand :%retab in vim)

Fixed.

> W: dtdparser non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
> The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid.  Valid groups are:
> "Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving",
> "Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases",
> "Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering",
> "Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia",
> "Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System",
> "Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers",
> "Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System",
> "Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System
> Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System
> Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User
> Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support".

This warning can be ignored.

> E: dtdparser tag-not-utf8 %changelog
> The character encoding of the value of this tag is not UTF-8.
> . use iconv to convert to UTF8

Fixed.

> W: dtdparser-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
> The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid.  Valid groups are:
> "Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving",
> "Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases",
> "Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering",
> "Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia",
> "Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System",
> "Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers",
> "Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System",
> "Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System
> Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System
> Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User
> Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support".

This warning can be ignored.

> E: dtdparser-javadoc tag-not-utf8 %changelog
> The character encoding of the value of this tag is not UTF-8.
> . use iconv to convert to UTF8

Fixed.

> E: dtdparser-javadoc zero-length
> /usr/share/javadoc/dtdparser-1.21/package-list
>  + I checked the build root on a local build and this seems to be created by
>    the javadoc task in ant. This can probably be ignored?

This warning can be ignored because the file is automated and thus, changing on
a daily basis.

> X make sure lines are <= 80 characters
>   . minor fixes needed

Fixed.


> X make a -doc sub-package if necessary
>   Standardize the javadoc package handling around
>   https://zarb.org/pipermail/jpackage-discuss/2007-February/011119.html
>  - see
>   
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-9bbfa57478f0460c6160947a6bf795249488182b

Fixed.

> X* package should own all directories and files
>  + Use jpackage-utils in Requires(x), Requires since installing to
> %{_javadir}/%{_javadocdir} 

Fixed.

> X* %doc files should not affect runtime
>   . javadoc should use %doc for its files

Fixed.

> X* verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPM
> rpm -qp --provides ../RPMS/noarch/dtdparser-*
> dtdparser = 0:1.21-3jpp
> dtdparser-javadoc = 0:1.21-3jpp
> rpm -qp --requires ../RPMS/noarch/dtdparser-*
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
>  . Requires needs jpakage-utils as mentioned earlier
>  . Should have a requires on java?

Fixed. 

The src rpm can be found at this link:
http://tequila-sunrise.ath.cx/rpmreviews/F7/dtdparser/dtdparser-1.21-3jpp.1.src.rpm

Let me know if there's anything else I need to fix or forgot to fix.  
Thanks.

Comment 4 Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-02-14 19:39:18 EST
Hmmm you seem to have uploaded the wrong srpm... Verify the above changes have
been made. Also, please add gcj support while you are at it.
Comment 5 Tania Bento 2007-02-15 14:27:44 EST
Everything seems okay - it even runs on mock with no errors!!!  

Here's the link to the source rpm:
http://tequila-sunrise.ath.cx/rpmreviews/F7/dtdparser/dtdparser-1.21-3jpp.1.fc7.src.rpm

Thanks Vivek.

Comment 6 Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-02-15 14:53:57 EST
rpmlint says:
W: dtdparser non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
W: dtdparser-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
Ignoring proup usage

E: dtdparser-javadoc zero-length /usr/share/javadoc/dtdparser/package-list
Ignoring since the package-list is generated at build time...

rpm -qp --provides
/home/vivekl/topdir-test/RPMS/i386/dtdparser-1.21-3jpp.1.fc7.i386.rpm
/home/vivekl/topdir-test/RPMS/i386/dtdparser-javadoc-1.21-3jpp.1.fc7.i386.rpm
/home/vivekl/topdir-test/RPMS/i386/dtdparser-debuginfo-1.21-3jpp.1.fc7.i386.rpm
dtdparser-1.21.jar.so  
dtdparser = 0:1.21-3jpp.1.fc7
dtdparser-javadoc = 0:1.21-3jpp.1.fc7
dtdparser-1.21.jar.so.debug  
dtdparser-debuginfo = 0:1.21-3jpp.1.fc7


rpm -qp --requires
/home/vivekl/topdir-test/RPMS/i386/dtdparser-1.21-3jpp.1.fc7.i386.rpm
/home/vivekl/topdir-test/RPMS/i386/dtdparser-javadoc-1.21-3jpp.1.fc7.i386.rpm
/home/vivekl/topdir-test/RPMS/i386/dtdparser-debuginfo-1.21-3jpp.1.fc7.i386.rpm
/bin/sh  
/bin/sh  
java  
java-gcj-compat  
java-gcj-compat  
jpackage-utils >= 0:1.6
jpackage-utils >= 0:1.6
libc.so.6  
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)  
libdl.so.2  
libgcc_s.so.1  
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)  
libgcj_bc.so.1  
libm.so.6  
libpthread.so.0  
librt.so.1  
libz.so.1  
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)  
jpackage-utils >= 0:1.6
jpackage-utils >= 0:1.6
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1



Comment 7 Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-02-15 14:54:39 EST
Everything looks good, APPROVED.
Assigning to nsantos to build it into rawhide. Please update when it makes it
into rawhide, on verification the bug can be closed.
Comment 8 Nuno Santos 2007-02-21 16:14:44 EST
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: dtdparser-1.21-3jpp
Short Description: A Java DTD Parser
Owners: nsantos@redhat.com
Branches: FC-7
InitialCC: rafaels@redhat.com,dbhole@redhat.com

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.