Spec URL: https://www.dropbox.com/s/o4yjlbky6k9i7np/openprops.spec SRPM URL: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5wjfyfpy5s158t7/openprops-0.6-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: OpenProps is a tiny Java library which reads and writes .properties files using the same code as java.util.Properties from the OpenJDK, but enhanced so that it preserves the order of entries within the file, and it also preserves comments in the file. This means that a Properties editor or a file converter written to use OpenProps won't have to lose comments or mess up the order of entries. By using OpenJDK code, OpenProps should handle all the old corner-cases in exactly the same way Java does. The handling of whitespace and comments is tested by a number of JUnit tests. But please let me know if you find a bug! Note the following differences from java.util.Properties: 1. preserves comments and the order of entries in the file 2. storeToXml doesn't use the Sun DTD (or any DTD) because it adds attributes for comments. 3. equals() and hashCode() won't work the same way as with java.util.Properties, because they are no longer inherited from Hashtable. All you get is identity equality/hashcode. Also note that any header comment in the .properties file will be interpreted as a comment attached to the first message. Fedora Account System Username: pahuang
koji build info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4929034
f17 koji build info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4929032 Comment 1 is f18 build
f18 success build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4931983 f19 success build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4931981
updated spec file with newer release number after fixing the problem koji build for f18: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4931993 koji build for f19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4932010 SPEC url: https://www.dropbox.com/s/o4yjlbky6k9i7np/openprops.spec SRPM URL: https://www.dropbox.com/s/mcpvr7s9ya4lgze/openprops-0.6-2.fc17.src.rpm
upstream changed. Updated spec file. Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pahuang/openprops.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pahuang/openprops-0.6-3.fc17.src.rpm f18 success build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4935415 f19 success build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4935440
Package Review ============== Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues ------ - 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. - License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. Both binary packages have to include COPYING.txt from source tarball - Spec use %global instead of %define. Please prefer %global instead of %define there used to be some problems in the past with incorrect %define use, so %global is preferred. That said, kudos for coming up with mvnbuildRequires macro :-) One more note: your files section could be simplified as such: %files -f .mfiles %doc README.txt COPYING.txt I'd also change the summary to: "An improved java.util.Properties from OpenJDK" These should be fairly easy to fix, other than that package looks OK. ===== 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]: 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 is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (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. [-]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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 requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [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 must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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 [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. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Java: [x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage [x]: Javadoc subpackages 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]: Pom files have correct add_maven_depmap call Note: Some add_maven_depmap calls found. Please check if they are correct [x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant [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: [-]: 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). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: 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]: 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. [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. Java: [x]: Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible) [x]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: openprops-0.6-3.fc19.noarch.rpm openprops-javadoc-0.6-3.fc19.noarch.rpm openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) util -> til, until, u til openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US util -> til, until, u til openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US whitespace -> white space, white-space, whites pace openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US storeToXml -> storeroom openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hashCode -> hash Code, hash-code, asphodel openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hashcode -> hash code, hash-code, asphodel openprops-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint openprops-javadoc openprops openprops-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) util -> til, until, u til openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US util -> til, until, u til openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US whitespace -> white space, white-space, whites pace openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US storeToXml -> storeroom openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hashCode -> hash Code, hash-code, asphodel openprops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hashcode -> hash code, hash-code, asphodel 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- openprops-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils openprops (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): java jpackage-utils Provides -------- openprops-javadoc: openprops-javadoc openprops: mvn(org.fedorahosted.openprops:openprops) openprops MD5-sum check ------------- https://github.com/zanata/openprops/archive/openprops-0.6.zip : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 4522ddb4247a1c0a5fc8aa2079c26fce884a46ebea676a13ad17d0df4e5b4794 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 4522ddb4247a1c0a5fc8aa2079c26fce884a46ebea676a13ad17d0df4e5b4794 Generated by fedora-review 0.4.0 (0dec099) last change: 2013-02-08 Buildroot used: fedora-raw-x86_64 Command line :/home/w0rm/work/projects/fedora-review/try-fedora-review -vb 908168
Updated spec according to review: SPEC url: http://fedorapeople.org/~pahuang/openprops.spec SRPM url: http://fedorapeople.org/~pahuang/openprops-0.6-4.fc17.src.rpm
Package is good, APPROVED
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: openprops Short Description: An improved java.util.Properties from OpenJDK Owners: pahuang seanf Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC:
git done
openprops-0.6-4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openprops-0.6-4.fc17
openprops-0.6-4.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openprops-0.6-4.fc18
openprops-0.6-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.
openprops-0.6-4.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
openprops-0.6-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.