Bug 881753 - Review Request: springframework-batch - Tools for enterprise batch or bulk processing
Summary: Review Request: springframework-batch - Tools for enterprise batch or bulk pr...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Michal Srb
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 866239 877152
Blocks: 968136
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-11-29 14:16 UTC by gil cattaneo
Modified: 2013-11-16 06:59 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc19
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-11-12 00:42:28 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
msrb: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description gil cattaneo 2012-11-29 14:16:15 UTC
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/springframework-batch.spec
SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description: 
Spring Batch provides tools for enterprise batch or bulk processing. It
can be used to wire up jobs, and track their execution, or simply as an
optimization for repetitive processing in a transactional environment.
Spring Batch is part of the Spring Portfolio.

Fedora Account System Username: gil

Comment 2 Michal Srb 2013-10-08 08:53:52 UTC
I will also need this package, taking this review.

Comment 4 Michal Srb 2013-10-15 06:33:36 UTC
I have a suggestion here. I would rename the package to "spring-batch". "springframework-batch" is not wrong, but we already have packages like spring-ldap, now spring-retry. These are standalone libraries that can be easily used outside of spring framework. However, if you don't agree it's not really a deal breaker for me. I will do the review anyway.

Comment 5 gil cattaneo 2013-10-15 10:47:09 UTC
(In reply to Michal Srb from comment #4)
> I have a suggestion here. I would rename the package to "spring-batch".
> "springframework-batch" is not wrong, but we already have packages like
> spring-ldap, now spring-retry. These are standalone libraries that can be
> easily used outside of spring framework. However, if you don't agree it's
> not really a deal breaker for me. I will do the review anyway.

for me it is not a problem, but the so called to make sure that users do not confuse it with the packages related to spring(rts) http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/spring.git/
i have already similar problem with hibernate packages, user confused this one with pm-hibernate (pm-utils)
regards

Comment 6 Michal Srb 2013-10-16 11:31:24 UTC
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #5)

> for me it is not a problem, but the so called to make sure that users do not
> confuse it with the packages related to spring(rts)
> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/spring.git/
> i have already similar problem with hibernate packages, user confused this
> one with pm-hibernate (pm-utils)
> regards

Never heard of spring RTS before. I am convinced that spring technologies are popular enough and people will not confuse "spring-batch - Tools for enterprise batch or bulk processing" with RTS game called spring. But like I said, it's up to you. If you like "springframework-batch" more, then I am OK with that.

Comment 7 Michal Srb 2013-10-24 12:12:08 UTC
It seems like people prefer springframework-* naming [1], so let's keep the name as it is.

[1]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/java-devel/2013-October/004967.html

Looks like there is some problem with hsqldb and springframework-batch. Probably due to fact that hsqldb1 is a compat package.

"Could not resolve dependencies for project org.springframework.batch:spring-batch-core:jar:2.1.9.RELEASE: Cannot access central (http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2) in offline mode and the artifact hsqldb:hsqldb:jar:SYSTEM has not been downloaded from it before."

However, instead of fixing this problem I would recommend updating this package to version 2.2.2 which depends on hsqldb 2.x.

Comment 8 gil cattaneo 2013-10-24 14:52:22 UTC
in my system (f19) is not available hsqldb 2.x, and i not sure if with the changes that you ask of me, there are no problems of compatibility.
for now leave hsqldb 1.x

Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/springframework-batch.spec
SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc19.src.rpm


Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6094671

Comment 9 gil cattaneo 2013-10-24 17:06:44 UTC
found a patch for hsqldb 2.x but is NOT applicable to this release
see https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-batch/pull/145

Comment 10 Michal Srb 2013-10-29 07:33:57 UTC
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable



===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
     supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
[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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
     in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Java:
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
     Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It is
     pulled in by maven-local
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
     subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build

Maven:
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even
     when building with ant
[x]: If tests are skipped during package build explain why it was needed in a
     comment
[x]: Pom files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
     utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use %{_mavenpomdir} instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
     from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     springframework-batch-javadoc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

Java:
[x]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.)
[x]: Packages are noarch unless they use JNI

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc21.noarch.rpm
          springframework-batch-javadoc-2.1.9-1.fc21.noarch.rpm
          springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc21.src.rpm
springframework-batch.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transactional -> transaction, transnational, transitional
springframework-batch.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transactional -> transaction, transnational, transitional
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint springframework-batch-javadoc springframework-batch
springframework-batch.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transactional -> transaction, transnational, transitional
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
springframework-batch-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    jpackage-utils

springframework-batch (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    jpackage-utils
    mvn(cglib:cglib)
    mvn(com.h2database:h2)
    mvn(com.thoughtworks.xstream:xstream)
    mvn(commons-collections:commons-collections)
    mvn(commons-dbcp:commons-dbcp)
    mvn(commons-io:commons-io)
    mvn(hsqldb:hsqldb:1)
    mvn(javax.mail:mail)
    mvn(javax.persistence:persistence-api)
    mvn(junit:junit)
    mvn(log4j:log4j)
    mvn(org.apache.felix:org.osgi.core)
    mvn(org.apache.geronimo.specs:geronimo-jms_1.1_spec)
    mvn(org.apache.geronimo.specs:geronimo-jta_1.1_spec)
    mvn(org.aspectj:aspectjweaver)
    mvn(org.codehaus.jackson:jackson-mapper-asl)
    mvn(org.codehaus.jettison:jettison)
    mvn(org.codehaus.woodstox:woodstox-core-asl)
    mvn(org.easymock:easymock)
    mvn(org.eclipse.gemini.blueprint:gemini-blueprint-core)
    mvn(org.hibernate:hibernate-core:3)
    mvn(org.hibernate:hibernate-entitymanager:3)
    mvn(org.slf4j:slf4j-log4j12)
    mvn(org.springframework.ws:spring-ws-core)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-aop)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-beans)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-context)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-context-support)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-core)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-jdbc)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-jms)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-orm)
    mvn(org.springframework:spring-tx)



Provides
--------
springframework-batch-javadoc:
    springframework-batch-javadoc

springframework-batch:
    mvn(org.springframework.batch:spring-batch)
    mvn(org.springframework.batch:spring-batch-core)
    mvn(org.springframework.batch:spring-batch-infrastructure)
    mvn(org.springframework.batch:spring-batch-parent)
    mvn(org.springframework.batch:spring-batch-parent:pom:)
    mvn(org.springframework.batch:spring-batch-test)
    mvn(org.springframework.batch:spring-batch:pom:)
    osgi(org.springframework.batch.core)
    osgi(org.springframework.batch.infrastructure)
    osgi(org.springframework.batch.test)
    springframework-batch



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-batch/archive/2.1.9.RELEASE.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 8382db69571fccf0101c85e26393fc1dd1ff480eff91cc552d04964756c499cf
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8382db69571fccf0101c85e26393fc1dd1ff480eff91cc552d04964756c499cf


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.0 (920221d) last change: 2013-08-30
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 881753
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Java

The package looks good, just one non-blocker:
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
Latest stable version is 2.2.2: https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-batch/releases

Could you please make me co-maintainer of this package? I can help with maintenance. Thanks.

Approved.

Comment 11 gil cattaneo 2013-10-29 07:51:30 UTC
Thanks!
yes, sure

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: springframework-batch
Short Description: Tools for enterprise batch or bulk processing
Owners: gil msrb
Branches: f19 f20
InitialCC: java-sig

Comment 12 gil cattaneo 2013-10-29 08:05:42 UTC
(In reply to Michal Srb from comment #10)
> The package looks good, just one non-blocker:
> [!]: Latest version is packaged.
> Latest stable version is 2.2.2:
> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-batch/releases

yes, but for now there are unavailable build deps
org.springframework.data
depend on querydsl 
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/querydsl-3.2.2-1.fc19.src.rpm
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/querydsl.spec

spring-data-commons
spring-data-mongodb
spring-data-neo4j
spring-data-gemfire
spring-data-redis
org.springframework.amqp: spring-amqp spring-rabbit

besides the fact that it depends on springframework 3.2.0.RELEASE

Comment 13 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-10-29 11:54:52 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2013-11-06 20:22:56 UTC
springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc19

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2013-11-06 22:11:23 UTC
springframework-batch-2.1.9-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/springframework-batch-2.1.9-2.fc20

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2013-11-07 19:07:56 UTC
springframework-batch-2.1.9-2.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository.

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2013-11-12 00:42:28 UTC
springframework-batch-2.1.9-2.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2013-11-16 06:59:33 UTC
springframework-batch-2.1.9-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.


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