Bug 589617 - Review Request: apache-commons-discovery - rename of jakarta-commons-discovery
Summary: Review Request: apache-commons-discovery - rename of jakarta-commons-discovery
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Alexander Kurtakov
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On: 589168
Blocks: JakartaCommonsRename
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2010-05-06 14:58 UTC by Stanislav Ochotnicky
Modified: 2014-01-17 16:03 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2010-05-11 07:36:08 UTC
Type: ---
akurtako: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-05-06 14:58:12 UTC
Spec URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/apache-commons-discovery.spec
SRPM URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/apache-commons-discovery-0.4-1.fc12.src.rpm

Description: Package was renamed from jakarta-commons-discovery. Discovery provides facilities for finding and instantiating classes, and for lifecycle management of singleton (factory) classes.

Comment 1 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-05-06 15:07:09 UTC
Adding bug #589168 as blocker because this package contains Requires on apache-commons-logging.

Comment 2 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-05-07 09:56:26 UTC
Fixed provides to not self-deprecate self.

Spec URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/apache-commons-discovery.spec

Also any reviewer should note that this is a re-review of existing package named jakarta-commons-discovery.

Comment 3 Peter Lemenkov 2010-05-07 10:02:07 UTC
*-javadoc subpackage must require owner of %{_javadocdir}, e.g. jpackage-utils. Also, I dont think that you should mark %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version} and %{_javadocdir}/%{name} as %dir explicitly.

Comment 4 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-05-07 12:05:53 UTC
Thanks for comments.

> -javadoc subpackage must require owner of %{_javadocdir}, e.g. jpackage-utils.

I fixed this but I will wait a bit before creating another revision in case something else comes up. I also noticed your question about javadoc requires on their parents on fedora-devel. Once that will be cleared up I will create new version of spec/srpm.

> Also, I dont think that you should mark %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version} and
> %{_javadocdir}/%{name} as %dir explicitly.

I am sorry, but as far as I see I named them using %doc not %dir. Is this wrong? I was told %doc is optional in this case but it will not hurt anything.

Comment 5 Peter Lemenkov 2010-05-08 07:35:46 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)

> I am sorry, but as far as I see I named them using %doc not %dir. Is this
> wrong? I was told %doc is optional in this case but it will not hurt anything.    

You're right - I was wrong here, so, please, disregard this particular objection.

Comment 6 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-05-10 11:28:04 UTC
I'm taking this one.

Comment 7 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-05-10 12:35:49 UTC

OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. OUTPUT:

apache-commons-discovery.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Pluggable -> Plug gable, Plug-gable, Plugged
apache-commons-discovery.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lifecycle -> life cycle, life-cycle, lifestyle

Not a problem. 

OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. 
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. 
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. 
OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. 
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. 
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly. 
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content. 
OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. Javadocs
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. 
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. 
OK: Package is correctly Obsoleting/Providing the package it's replacing.

You don't need the %global section free line - it's of no use.

This package is APPROVED.

Comment 8 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-05-10 12:36:43 UTC
P.S. Please make the changes asked from Peter. I assumed them for fixed.

Comment 10 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-05-10 13:03:20 UTC
Thanks. Requesting CVS:

New Package CVS Request
Package Name: apache-commons-discovery
Short Description: Apache Commons Discovery
Owners: sochotni

Comment 11 Kevin Fenzi 2010-05-11 04:44:51 UTC
CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).

Remember to assign the review to the reviewer.

Comment 12 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-05-11 07:36:08 UTC
Package build finished in koji. Closing. Thanks all

Comment 13 Lubomir Rintel 2014-01-17 15:58:51 UTC
Package Change Request
Package Name: apache-commons-discovery
New Branches: epel7
Owners: lkundrak

Requesting an EPEL branch, maintainer agrees to this and is not willing to maintain the branch himself.

Comment 14 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-01-17 16:03:25 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

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