[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 gil cattaneochanged: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1181081 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181081 [Bug 1181081] wildfly: Upgrade to 10.1.0.Final -- 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 Fedora Update Systemchanged: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-05-07 07:45:44 -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System--- jetbrains-annotations-15.0-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 Fedora Update Systemchanged: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- jetbrains-annotations-15.0-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-5a560d7399 -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System--- jetbrains-annotations-15.0-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-5a560d7399 -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 Fedora Update Systemchanged: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla--- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/jetbrains-annotations -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 gil cattaneochanged: 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. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #6 from gil cattaneo--- Thanks for the review! SCM request: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/requests/5102 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/requests/5103 -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 Tomas Repikchanged: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Tomas Repik --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4) > If it is for the source code just take a look at the POM file > (maven-antrun-plugin). Instead, for the functionality of these apis just the > generated java documentation. Finally I do not think I will add nothing else. > Thanks for your patience All right Javadoc is fine I guess. The package is by my opinion ready. -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo--- (In reply to Tomas Repik from comment #3) > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #2) > > What do you mean? > I meant that the timestamps issue is also mentioned in guidelines so > therefore I considered that the guidelines are not met. > > Solved > By soliving timestamps you also solved guidelines issue. As simple as that. Maybe could i remove, the code do not contains resources ... > > The original source code is available @ > > https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community/ which include LICENSES > > files. But i don't want use because i don't want download also 3 GB of > > useless crap for only 113 KB of source code > I agree, sounds reasonable. > > documentation as above > All right I don't pursue including the whole documentation. I also think > creating a simple readme at least explaining where to find information in > case of need would be nice. Also for tracking reasons. It's not mandatory > though. > > Just a quick yes or no answer on the documentation and I'll approve this > package. Sorry i do not understand that kind of documentation is needed. If it is for the source code just take a look at the POM file (maven-antrun-plugin). Instead, for the functionality of these apis just the generated java documentation. Finally I do not think I will add nothing else. Thanks for your patience -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #3 from Tomas Repik--- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #2) > What do you mean? I meant that the timestamps issue is also mentioned in guidelines so therefore I considered that the guidelines are not met. > Solved By soliving timestamps you also solved guidelines issue. As simple as that. > The original source code is available @ > https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community/ which include LICENSES > files. But i don't want use because i don't want download also 3 GB of > useless crap for only 113 KB of source code I agree, sounds reasonable. > documentation as above All right I don't pursue including the whole documentation. I also think creating a simple readme at least explaining where to find information in case of need would be nice. Also for tracking reasons. It's not mandatory though. Just a quick yes or no answer on the documentation and I'll approve this package. -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo--- (In reply to Tomas Repik from comment #1) > Package Review > == > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > > Issues > == > [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines What do you mean? > [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. > - as in packaging guidelines the package should preserve timestamps. [1]\ > In spec file I can see: "cp $cpfrom $cpto" should there be also a -p > option like guidelines say Solved > Shoulds > === > [!]: 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. > - these two go hand in hand I think > The original source code is available @ > https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community/ which include LICENSES > files. But i don't want use because i don't want download also 3 GB of > useless crap for only 113 KB of source code > rpmlint > === > jetbrains-annotations.noarch: W: no-documentation > - isn't there a documentation somewhere? There has to be some I think! as above Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/jetbrains-annotations.spec SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/jetbrains-annotations-15.0-2.fc23.src.rpm -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 --- Comment #1 from Tomas Repik--- Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues == [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. - as in packaging guidelines the package should preserve timestamps. [1]\ In spec file I can see: "cp $cpfrom $cpto" should there be also a -p option like guidelines say Shoulds === [!]: 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. - these two go hand in hand I think rpmlint === jetbrains-annotations.noarch: W: no-documentation - isn't there a documentation somewhere? There has to be some I think! = 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. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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 [-]: 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. [!]: 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 %license. [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]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [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 does not use a name that already exists. [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]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build [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) Maven: [x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) 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 DO NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 Tomas Repikchanged: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||tre...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tre...@redhat.com 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 gil cattaneochanged: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1328868 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328868 [Bug 1328868] Review Request: presto - Distributed SQL query engine for big data -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 gil cattaneochanged: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1328063 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328063 [Bug 1328063] Review Request: wildfly-common - A WildFly common utilities 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328062] Review Request: jetbrains-annotations - IntelliJ IDEA Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062 gil cattaneochanged: 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. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org