Bug 803376 - Review Request: weld-parent - Parent POM for Weld
Summary: Review Request: weld-parent - Parent POM for Weld
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mary Ellen Foster
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 803381 805468
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-03-14 15:24 UTC by Marek Goldmann
Modified: 2012-04-12 02:03 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: weld-parent-17-2.fc17
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-04-12 02:03:32 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
mefoster: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 1 Mary Ellen Foster 2012-03-19 15:05:51 UTC
I will review this package

Comment 2 Mary Ellen Foster 2012-03-19 15:29:29 UTC
Package Review
==============

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

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[ ]  Rpmlint output:
weld-parent.spec: W: no-%build-section
The spec file does not contain a %build section.  Even if some packages don't
directly need it, section markers may be overridden in rpm's configuration to
provide additional "under the hood" functionality, such as injection of
automatic -debuginfo subpackages.  Add the section, even if empty.

[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: ASL 2.0
[x]  Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]  Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package    : 73d0f0fdbacad7684326e96b4b717175
MD5SUM upstream package: 73d0f0fdbacad7684326e96b4b717175
[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.
[x]  Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]  Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x]  All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[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
[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]  Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x]  Latest version is packaged.
[x]  Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: 2012-03-19


Suggestions:
- As suggested by sochotni on IRC, add a %build section containing "mvn-rpmbuild install" and update BuildRequires as appropriate
- Suggest using %{version} (and maybe also %{name}) throughout the Source0 URL

Comment 4 Mary Ellen Foster 2012-03-19 16:26:21 UTC
Looks good,

APPROVED

Comment 5 Marek Goldmann 2012-03-19 18:06:09 UTC
Thanks for review!

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name:      weld-parent
Short Description: Parent POM for Weld
Owners:            goldmann
Branches:          f17

Comment 6 Gwyn Ciesla 2012-03-19 18:54:18 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2012-03-19 19:40:28 UTC
weld-parent-17-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/weld-parent-17-2.fc17

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2012-03-20 06:04:40 UTC
Package weld-parent-17-2.fc17:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing weld-parent-17-2.fc17'
as soon as you are able to.
Please go to the following url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-4215/weld-parent-17-2.fc17
then log in and leave karma (feedback).

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2012-04-12 02:03:32 UTC
weld-parent-17-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


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