[Bug 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091

Ding-Yi Chen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2016-07-17 21:00:30



-- 
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 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091



--- Comment #20 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/enunciate

-- 
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 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091



--- Comment #19 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/enunciate (Re-review:
enunciate-core-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
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091

gil cattaneo  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.
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 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #18 from gil cattaneo  ---
Issues (non blocking):

[!]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.

Please, change the spec file this way:


BuildRequires: mvn(org.codehaus.jackson:jackson-jaxrs)
BuildRequires: mvn(org.codehaus.jackson:jackson-xc)
BuildRequires: mvn(org.codehaus.mojo:build-helper-maven-plugin)
BuildRequires: mvn(org.easymock:easymock)

BuildArch: noarch
Provides:  %{name}-core-annotations = %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{name}-core-annotations <=
%{old_enunciate_core_annotations_ver}

%description
%{summary}.

%package javadoc
Summary:   Javadoc for %{name}
Provides:  %{name}-core-annotations-javadoc = %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{name}-core-annotations-javadoc <=
%{old_enunciate_core_annotations_ver}

%description javadoc
This package contains the API documentation for %{name}.

%prep


Approved

-- 
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 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091



--- Comment #17 from gil cattaneo  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



= 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: "Apache (v2.0)", "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated", "*No
 copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 385 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1352091-enunciate/licensecheck.txt
NOTE: is enable other module (e.g. enunciate-core) license field must
change in: ASL 2.0 and BSD
[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.
[?]: 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 %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]: 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-
 utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use .mfiles file list 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).
[-]: Fully versioned 

[Bug 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091

Ding-Yi Chen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1355948




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1355948
[Bug 1355948] [abrt] zanata-client-3.8.4-1.fc24: Uncaught exception
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError in method
org.zanata.client.ZanataClient.processArgs()
-- 
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 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091



--- Comment #16 from Ding-Yi Chen  ---
Merge all sub-package in to main, and add Provides and Obsoletes to
enunciate-core-annotations

Spec URL: https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/enunciate.spec
SRPM URL:
https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/enunciate-1.31-5.fc24.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
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091



--- Comment #15 from Ding-Yi Chen  ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #14)
> Created attachment 1176834 [details]
> enunciate licensececk
> 
> see enunciate-licensececk.txt
> this is a list with all source files without license headers
> you should report the underlying problem to upstream and
> make sure that in the new version this problem is not present
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/
> LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification

Filed as https://github.com/stoicflame/enunciate/issues/450

However, I don't think the fix will apply to 1.X.


Spec URL: https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/enunciate.spec
SRPM URL:
https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/enunciate-1.31-4.fc24.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
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091



--- Comment #14 from gil cattaneo  ---
Created attachment 1176834
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1176834=edit
enunciate licensececk

see enunciate-licensececk.txt
this is a list with all source files without license headers
you should report the underlying problem to upstream and
make sure that in the new version this problem is not present
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification

-- 
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 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091



--- Comment #13 from gil cattaneo  ---
Created attachment 1176832
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1176832=edit
spec file changes

- remove useless main package
- fix jersey version and cglib aId
- fix BRs list

Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14790219

-- 
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 1352091] Review Request: enunciate (Re-review: enunciate-core-annotations) - Build-time enhancement tool for Java-based Web services projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352091

Ding-Yi Chen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: enunciate - |Review Request: enunciate
   |Build-time enhancement tool |(Re-review:
   |for Java-based Web services |enunciate-core-annotations)
   |projects|- Build-time enhancement
   ||tool for Java-based Web
   ||services projects



--- Comment #12 from Ding-Yi Chen  ---
I've added the provides and obsoletes so it should work with dnf.

Spec URL: https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/enunciate.spec
SRPM URL:
https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/enunciate-1.31-3.fc24.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
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org