[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #13 from Ismael Olea --- OK :-) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo --- because i commited an error ...sorry [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/java Requires snip (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #11 from Ismael Olea --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #9) > better to add, only to the main package > Requires: java-headless > Requires: javapackages-tools Why do you think is better? :-m -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 Ismael Olea changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-08-20 05:24:01 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #9 from gil cattaneo --- better to add, only to the main package Requires: java-headless Requires: javapackages-tools -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 Ismael Olea changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Ismael Olea --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: snip Short Description: An Ant task designed to help with the single-sourcing of program documentation Upstream URL: http://www.martiansoftware.com/lab/snip/ Owners: olea Branches: f21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #7 from Ismael Olea --- o/ Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from gil cattaneo ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- This seems like a Java package, please install fedora-review-plugin-java to
get additional checks
= 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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"BSD (2 clause)". Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/gil/1130756-snip/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/java
[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
[-]: 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.
[-]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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 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]: 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]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
= 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in snip-
javadoc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
[-]: 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.
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreRe
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added 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. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #5 from Ismael Olea --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) Done: http://olea.org/tmp/snip-0.11-3.fc22.src.rpm http://olea.org/tmp/snip.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo --- see also (as spec file template): https://fedorahosted.org/released/javapackages/doc/#ant https://fedorahosted.org/released/javapackages/doc/#packaging_maven_project -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 --- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo --- (In reply to Ismael Olea from comment #2) > fixed: > > http://olea.org/tmp/snip-0.11-2.fc22.src.rpm > http://olea.org/tmp/snip.spec what did you corrected? remain again the problems reported @ comment c1 the reasons was explained @ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127879#c8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756
--- Comment #2 from Ismael Olea ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #1)
> there are also unneeded BR:
> BuildRequires: java-devel >= 1:1.6.0
> you can use only
> BuildRequires: javapackages-tools
>
> unnecessary Requires (XMvn handled by javapackages-*)
> Requires: java-headless >= 1:1.6.0
> Requires: javapackages-tools
> also for sub package javadoc
> Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
> Requires: javapackages-tools
>
> "Group:" tag is no longer necessary.
>
> please use %dir %{_javadir}/ instead of %dir /usr/share/java
fixed:
http://olea.org/tmp/snip-0.11-2.fc22.src.rpm
http://olea.org/tmp/snip.spec
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||punto...@libero.it
--- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo ---
there are also unneeded BR:
BuildRequires: java-devel >= 1:1.6.0
you can use only
BuildRequires: javapackages-tools
unnecessary Requires (XMvn handled by javapackages-*)
Requires: java-headless >= 1:1.6.0
Requires: javapackages-tools
also for sub package javadoc
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Requires: javapackages-tools
"Group:" tag is no longer necessary.
please use %dir %{_javadir}/ instead of %dir /usr/share/java
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1130756] Review Request: snip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130756 Ismael Olea changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1127894 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127894 [Bug 1127894] Review Request: jsap -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
