Bug 796201 - Review Request: glassfish-jaxb - JAXB Reference Implementation
Summary: Review Request: glassfish-jaxb - JAXB Reference Implementation
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Andy Grimm
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 790549 790553 790564 794725 801695
Blocks: 796204 800720
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-02-22 13:23 UTC by Juan Hernández
Modified: 2016-11-08 03:46 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version: glassfish-jaxb-2.2.5-2.fc17
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-03-12 12:51:11 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
agrimm: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 1 Juan Hernández 2012-03-02 09:50:22 UTC
The spec needed some minor updates after changing the names of the jar files in txw2. The new spec and SRPM are available here:

http://jhernand.fedorapeople.org/rpms/glassfish-jaxb/2.2.4u1-3

Comment 2 Juan Hernández 2012-03-07 16:37:54 UTC
The spec needed changes in order to build with the renamed glassfish-fastinfoset package. The new spec and SRPM are available here:

http://jhernand.fedorapeople.org/rpms/glassfish-jaxb/2.2.4u1-4

Comment 3 Andy Grimm 2012-03-09 00:04:26 UTC
This package requires stax-ex, which does not appear to be posted for review anywhere.  It is in marek's queue here:

http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/jboss_as/queue/2012-01-21/

Comment 4 Juan Hernández 2012-03-09 07:46:11 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> This package requires stax-ex, which does not appear to be posted for review
> anywhere.  It is in marek's queue here:
> 
> http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/jboss_as/queue/2012-01-21

Thanks for catching this. Submited stax-ex for review, see bug 801695.

Comment 5 Juan Hernández 2012-03-09 16:06:01 UTC
The stax-ex package is in rawhide now.

Comment 6 Andy Grimm 2012-03-10 00:53:40 UTC
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!]  Rpmlint output:
glassfish-jaxb.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/glassfish-jaxb/jaxb-xjc.jar
glassfish-jaxb.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/glassfish-jaxb/jaxb-impl.jar
glassfish-jaxb.src: W: invalid-url Source0: glassfish-jaxb-2.2.4u1.tar.gz
glassfish-jaxb-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.

The class-path-in-manifest errors should be fixed.  See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#class-path-in-manifest

[x]  Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x]  Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format %{name}.spec.
[x]  Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x]  Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x]  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: CDDL and GPLv2 with exceptions
[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.
[-]  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.
[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 or must require other packages for directories it uses.
[x]  Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]  File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with good reason
[x]  Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]  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
[x]  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
[-]  Package uses %global not %define
[x]  If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x]  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.
[x]  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_maven_depmap

=== 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 "-Dmaven.local.depmap.file=*" explain why it's needed in a comment
[x]  Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]  Packages DOES NOT 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)
[!]  Latest version is packaged.
[x]  Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide x86_64


=== Issues ===
1. Please fix the class-path-in-manifest rpmlint messages
2. Version 2.2.5 was released in February.  Please update the package.

Comment 7 Juan Hernández 2012-03-10 17:40:01 UTC
Updated to 2.2.5 and removed the class-path entry from manifests. The new .spec and SRPM are available here:

http://jhernand.fedorapeople.org/rpms/glassfish-jaxb/2.2.5-1

Koji scratch build:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3878301

Comment 8 Andy Grimm 2012-03-11 15:14:41 UTC
Confirmed that the rpmlint issue is fixed.  Looks good.

APPROVED

Comment 9 Juan Hernández 2012-03-11 19:40:01 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: glassfish-jaxb
Short Description: JAXB Reference Implementation
Owners: jhernand
Branches: f17
InitialCC: goldmann

Comment 10 Gwyn Ciesla 2012-03-12 12:12:41 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2012-03-23 15:08:26 UTC
glassfish-jaxb-2.2.5-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glassfish-jaxb-2.2.5-2.fc17

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2012-04-12 01:52:52 UTC
glassfish-jaxb-2.2.5-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.


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