Bug 532526 - Review request: jrexx - Automaton based regular expression API for Java
Summary: Review request: jrexx - Automaton based regular expression API for Java
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2009-11-02 18:01 UTC by Mary Ellen Foster
Modified: 2010-11-06 01:17 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2010-11-06 01:17:36 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Mary Ellen Foster 2009-11-02 18:01:03 UTC
Spec URL: http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~mef3/review/jrexx.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~mef3/review/jrexx-1.1.1-5.fc12.src.rpm
jrexx is a powerful easy-to-use regular expression 
API for textual pattern matching. Technically jrexx 
uses a minimized deterministic FSA (finite state 
automaton) and compiles the textual representation 
of the regular expression into such an automaton. 
Besides the usual pattern matching functionality, 
jrexx provides an introspection API for exploration 
of the automaton's structure by 'states' and 
'transitions'. Since the automaton is deterministic 
and minimized the pattern matching alogorithm is 
extremly fast (compared to the java regular 
expression API in JDK1.4) and works with huge 
patterns and input texts. Since FSA can be handled 
as sets, jrexx also offers all basic set operations 
for complement, union, intersection and difference, 
which is not provided by other regex implementations 
(as far as we know). 

This package was imported from JPackage

Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2009-11-02 20:24:11 UTC
Is this an attempt to bring the jrexx package back into Fedora?  It's dead.package'd in devel but it's present in F-11.  There seem to be some interesting differences between your submission and what's currently in the shipping distros.  At least the scriptlets and the installation of the pom files come to mind.  For the sake of any reviewers you may get, you should at least comment on the fact that the package is already in the distro in a different form and describe any differences between your package and what they'll see if they check it out from our CVS.

Comment 2 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-06 01:17:36 UTC
It's been over a year since I posed that question and there was never any response.  I'm just going to close this.

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