Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 824976
Review Request: glassfish-toplink-essentials - Glassfish JPA Toplink Essentials
Last modified: 2013-03-13 00:27:30 EDT
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Glassfish Persistence Implementation. Fedora Account System Username: gil
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials/2/glassfish-toplink-essentials.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials/2/glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-1.fc16.src.rpm tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4206022
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials/2/glassfish-toplink-essentials.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials/2/glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-2.fc16.src.rpm
Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated === REQUIRED ITEMS === [!] Rpmlint output: $ rpmlint glassfish-toplink-essentials.spec glassfish-toplink-essentials.spec: W: invalid-url Source1: glassfish-bootstrap.tar.gz 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-2.fc16.src.rpm glassfish-toplink-essentials.src: W: invalid-url Source1: glassfish-bootstrap.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings $ rpmlint glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-2.fc17.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint glassfish-toplink-essentials-javadoc-2.0.46-2.fc17.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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. [!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2]. See Issue (1) [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: [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. glassfish-persistence-v2-b46-src.zip : MD5SUM this package : efd7acb74e5b6417d29801ad70e6c883 MD5SUM upstream package : efd7acb74e5b6417d29801ad70e6c883 [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5]. [-] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other packages for directories it uses. See Issue (1) [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) [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, ...) [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. [-] 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. Issue (2) [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4205990 === Issues === 1. You're placing jars in glassfish directory, but this dir is not owned by any package. There are only 2 jar files, so you don't need to put them into subdir; simply put both files in %{_javadir}. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership 2. I am not sure where does version come from; do you really need to download part from 2.0 and part from 2.1 branches? How about pulling only http://dlc.sun.com.edgesuite.net/javaee5/v2.1.2_branch/promoted/source/glassfish-v2.1.2-b05g-src.zip looks like it contains all the code you need. Does it need to be 2.x branch at all? Maybe it would be better to build 3.1 from svn? 3. Is http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/ias/toplink/jpa/index.html really proper url for this project? Software from that link is licensed differently... maybe you should replace it with http://glassfish.java.net/? === Final Notes === 1. http://download.java.net/ redirects to http://dlc.sun.com.edgesuite.net/ so use newer url, please.
[x] Rpmlint output (I forgot to change it from review of release 1)
=== Issues === 1. You're placing jars in glassfish directory, but this dir is not owned by any package. There are only 2 jar files, so you don't need to put them into subdir; simply put both files in %{_javadir}. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership corrected 2. I am not sure where does version come from; do you really need to download part from 2.0 and part from 2.1 branches? yes is only required for build and i take a suggestion from here https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=glassfish-persistence.spec&package=glassfish-persistence&project=Java%3Ajpackage-5.0&rev=e2131cccbf1f703e9677245b44be5d38 How about pulling only http://dlc.sun.com.edgesuite.net/javaee5/v2.1.2_branch/promoted/source/glassfish-v2.1.2-b05g-src.zip looks like it contains all the code you need. i dont want import glassfish 2.x and the source package is very big for 1 library (37MB) Does it need to be 2.x branch at all? yes Maybe it would be better to build 3.1 from svn? non available in 3.x and glassfish 3 require hk2 http://hk2.java.net/ for build 3. Is http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/ias/toplink/jpa/index.html really proper url for this project? Software from that link is licensed differently... maybe you should replace it with http://glassfish.java.net/? corrected === Final Notes === 1. http://download.java.net/ redirects to http://dlc.sun.com.edgesuite.net/ so use newer url, please. corrected Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials/3/glassfish-toplink-essentials.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-toplink-essentials/3/glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-3.fc16.src.rpm - moved in files in %%{_javadir} - fixed Url and source0 url
================ *** APPROVED *** ================ When importing to scm, I suggest replacing: gzip -dc %{SOURCE1} | tar xf - with: tar xzf %{SOURCE1}
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: glassfish-toplink-essentials Short Description: Glassfish JPA Toplink Essentials Owners: gil Branches: f17 InitialCC: java-sig
Git done (by process-git-requests).
glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-3.fc17
glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-3.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.
glassfish-toplink-essentials-2.0.46-3.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.