Bug 824838 - Review Request: arquillian-core - Arquillian is a revolutionary testing platform built on the JVM
Summary: Review Request: arquillian-core - Arquillian is a revolutionary testing platf...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Marek Goldmann
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-05-24 12:14 UTC by Lin Gao
Modified: 2012-06-30 08:26 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-06-30 08:26:36 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
mgoldman: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Lin Gao 2012-05-24 12:14:26 UTC
Spec URL: http://fedorapkgs-gaolin.rhcloud.com/arquillian.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapkgs-gaolin.rhcloud.com/arquillian-1.0.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description: 
  Arquillian is a revolutionary testing platform built on the JVM that
substantially reduces the effort required to write and execute Java 
middleware integration and functional tests. No more mocks. 
No more container lifecycle and deployment hassles. Just real tests!

Fedora Account System Username: lgao

Comment 1 Lin Gao 2012-05-24 13:38:53 UTC
I need a sponsor

Comment 3 Lin Gao 2012-05-29 11:38:23 UTC
I have been sponsored. :)

Comment 4 Dan Allen 2012-05-29 19:26:29 UTC
Great job Lin. Thanks for taking the lead on this effort.

I'd like to recommend renaming the package from "arquillian" to "arquillian-core".

When Arquillian was started, it was just one repository that grew and grew. Last summer the project was split into individual components, which consists of core and a plethora of extensions. Core is what you are packaging here, and it's definitely the right place to start.

The other packages would follow this naming convention of arquillian-*. For example, Drone would be packaged as arquillian-drone (though Drone may have subpackages as well).

Comment 5 Lin Gao 2012-05-30 08:56:43 UTC
Get it, Dan.

Rename the package to: arquillian-core.
Spec URL: http://fedorapkgs-gaolin.rhcloud.com/arquillian-core.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapkgs-gaolin.rhcloud.com/arquillian-core-1.0.0-1.Final.fc16.src.rpm

Comment 6 Lin Gao 2012-05-31 05:09:10 UTC
shrinkwrap-descriptors has been available in the buildroot, arquillian-core can be built successfully, thus this can be reviewed now.

Comment 7 Marek Goldmann 2012-06-05 15:28:00 UTC
Package Review
==============

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

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x]  Rpmlint output:

SPECS/arquillian-core.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: arquillian-core-1.0.0.Final.tar.xz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
arquillian-core.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware -> middle ware, middle-ware, middleweight
arquillian-core.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lifecycle -> life cycle, life-cycle, Wycliffe
arquillian-core.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org/arquillian HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
arquillian-core.src: W: invalid-url Source0: arquillian-core-1.0.0.Final.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
arquillian-core.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware -> middle ware, middle-ware, middleweight
arquillian-core.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lifecycle -> life cycle, life-cycle, Wycliffe
arquillian-core.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org/arquillian HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
arquillian-core-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
arquillian-core-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org/arquillian HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.

[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]  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    : 2161ad92cc48dcd356ee28ab2495059c
MD5SUM upstream package: 2161ad92cc48dcd356ee28ab2495059c
[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]  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)
[!]  Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils

See issue #3.

[x]  Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x]  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, ...)
[-]  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.

1.0.1.Final was released.

[x]  Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4129291

=== Issues ===
1. Release is wrong. If the version is a final, ga, etc, we don't add the suffix, in your case it should be just:

Release:        1%{?dist}

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning

Please fix also the changelog.

2. Add more memory for Maven, because sometimes the build fails. this should do the trick (in %build):

export MAVEN_OPTS="-Xms256m -Xmx768m -XX:PermSize=128m -XX:MaxPermSize=256m"

3. "Requires: jpackage-utils" is missing.

=== Final Notes ===
1. Please try to package newer version: 1.0.1.Final
2. readme.txt file is not required in -javadoc subpackage.

Please fix all issues and consider fixing the notes too.

Comment 9 Marek Goldmann 2012-06-06 06:48:50 UTC
Looks good now!

Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4131720

================
*** APPROVED ***
================

Comment 10 Lin Gao 2012-06-06 07:01:29 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: arquillian-core
Short Description: Arquillian is a revolutionary testing platform built on the JVM
Owners: lgao
Branches: f17
InitialCC: goldmann

Comment 11 Gwyn Ciesla 2012-06-06 13:23:36 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2012-06-07 06:02:13 UTC
arquillian-core-1.0.1-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/arquillian-core-1.0.1-1.fc17

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2012-06-07 23:03:16 UTC
arquillian-core-1.0.1-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2012-06-30 08:26:36 UTC
arquillian-core-1.0.1-1.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.