[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2013-10-24 16:17:06 --- Comment #8 from Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt --- Built in rawhide, thanks guys! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 --- Comment #1 from Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt --- @gil: thanks for taking this. I've just noticed a small problem that I'm fixing with a missing BR. I'll have an updated spec/srpm uploaded in a minute. Sorry about that! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- net.sourceforge.findbugs:annotations ? [ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project truecommons-parent: Could not resolve dependencies for project net.java.truecommons:truecommons-parent:pom:67: Cannot access central (http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2) in offline mode and the artifact net.sourceforge.findbugs:annotations:jar:any has not been downloaded from it before. - [Help 1] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 --- Comment #3 from Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt --- Spec URL: http://galileo.fedorapeople.org/truecommons-parent/67-2/truecommons-parent-67-2.fc21.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://galileo.fedorapeople.org/truecommons-parent/67-2/truecommons-parent.spec Added findbugs as a BR so that it can build successfully. Koji scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6092121 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)
Note: No javadoc subpackage present
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Javadoc_installation
- Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
Note: No javadoc subpackage present
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Javadoc_installation
IGNORE the package contains only the parent pom project truecommons
= 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.
[!]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Apache (v2.0). Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1022735
-truecommons-parent/licensecheck.txt
[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]: 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.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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]: 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]: 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
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 --- Comment #6 from Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4) [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. please, open a bug @ https://java.net/jira/browse/TRUECOMMONS to include license text at https://hg.java.net/hg/truecommons~parent Will do. Thanks a lot for the review! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1022735] Review Request: truecommons-parent - Renaming from schlichtherle-oss-parent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022735 Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Gerard Ryan ger...@ryan.lt --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: truecommons-parent Short Description: Parent POM for Open Source Software projects Owners: galileo Branches: f20 InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
