Bug 647602 - Review Request: ant-antunit - Provide antunit ant task
Summary: Review Request: ant-antunit - Provide antunit ant task
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Alexander Kurtakov
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 647885
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-10-28 21:17 UTC by Orion Poplawski
Modified: 2010-12-09 16:09 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-12-09 16:09:35 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
akurtako: fedora-review+
petersen: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Orion Poplawski 2010-10-28 21:17:54 UTC
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/apache-ant-antunit.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/apache-ant-antunit-1.1-1.fc14.src.rpm
Description:
The <antunit> task drives the tests much like <junit> does for JUnit tests.

When called on a build file, the task will start a new Ant project for that
build file and scan for targets with names that start with "test". For each
such target it then will:

   1. Execute the target named setUp, if there is one.
   2. Execute the target itself - if this target depends on other targets the
      normal Ant rules apply and the dependent targets are executed first.
   3. Execute the target names tearDown, if there is one.

Comment 1 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-10-29 06:24:41 UTC
Hi Orion,
You're missing the %{_sysconfdir}/ant.d file creation and installation. Take a look at ant.spec to see what they contain and how are created.

Comment 2 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-10-29 06:27:22 UTC
Oh and ant package doesn't have apache in front maybe this one shouldn't have one too.

Comment 3 Orion Poplawski 2010-10-29 14:56:23 UTC
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/apache-ant-antunit.spec
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/apache-ant-antunit-1.1-2.fc14.src.rpm

* Fri Oct 29 2010 Orion Poplawski <orion.com> 1.1-2
- Add /etc/ant.d/antunit
- Add Requires: ant

I kept going back and forth about the name.  Ultimately I felt that apache-ant-antunit was more in line with current naming schemes (it's what the tarball is named).  I do have a Provides: ant-antunit as well.  But I could be convinced to drop the apache.

Comment 4 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-06 22:17:39 UTC
I'll do this one.

Comment 5 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-06 22:37:39 UTC
Package Review
==============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x]  Rpmlint output:
apache-ant-antunit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US junit -> unit, j unit, jun it
apache-ant-antunit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setUp -> set Up, setup, setups
apache-ant-antunit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tearDown -> tear Down, tear-Down, tear-down
apache-ant-antunit.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/apache-ant-antunit
Not a problem
[!]  Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. I still think it's better to name it just ant-antunit for the sake of consistency with the rest of the ant packages.
[x]  Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format %{name}.spec.
[!]  Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2]. Remove versioned jar and javadoc.
[x]  Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[!]  Buildroot definition is not present
[x]  Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines[3,4].
[x]  License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 2.0
[x]  If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]  All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x]  Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]  Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package    :6a9b3db4333be1f2b45b11917811da5e
MD5SUM upstream package:6a9b3db4333be1f2b45b11917811da5e
[x]  All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x]  Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]  Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]  Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]  Permissions on files are set properly.
[!]  Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x]  Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT mixing)
[x]  Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-]  Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-]  Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]  Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]  Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage
[!]  Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x]  Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x]  Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x]  Package uses %global not %define
[-]  If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-]  If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be removed prior to building
[x]  All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[!]  Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x]  If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant
[x]  pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom file (use "JPP." and "JPP-" correctly)

=== Maven ===
[x]  Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-]  If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a comment
[-]  If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven2.jpp.depmap.file=*" explain why it's needed in a comment
[x]  Package uses %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]  Packages have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-utils (for %update_maven_depmap macro)

=== Other suggestions ===
[x]  If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x]  Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x]  Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x]  Latest version is packaged.

=== Issues ===
1. Naming. Can we drop apache to match the rest of the ant packages?
2. Don't install versioned jar and javadoc.
3. Remove clean section and buildroot tag.

Comment 6 Orion Poplawski 2010-12-06 22:47:25 UTC
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ant-antunit.spec
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ant-antunit-1.1-3.fc14.src.rpm

* Mon Dec 6 2010 Orion Poplawski <orion.com> 1.1-3
- Rename to ant-antunit
- Drop BuildRoot and %%clean

Comment 7 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-06 22:54:21 UTC
Please drop the following line when you commit:
Provides:         %{name} = %{version}-%{release}

It is not needed.

The package is APPROVED.

Comment 8 Orion Poplawski 2010-12-06 22:55:59 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: ant-antunit
Short Description: Provide antunit ant task
Owners: orion
Branches: f14 f13 el6
InitialCC:

Comment 9 Orion Poplawski 2010-12-06 23:00:09 UTC
Good catch on the Provides.  Fixed.

Comment 10 Jens Petersen 2010-12-09 00:54:14 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 11 Orion Poplawski 2010-12-09 16:09:35 UTC
Imported and built.  Thanks.


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