[Bug 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- legendsbrowser-1.0.12-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-08-10 03:23:23 -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- legendsbrowser-1.0.12-3.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 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- legendsbrowser-1.0.12-3.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-2016-150f435641 -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- legendsbrowser-1.0.12-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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-d8e2d68ad5 -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- legendsbrowser-1.0.12-3.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-150f435641 -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- legendsbrowser-1.0.12-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-d8e2d68ad5 -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 Fedora Update System changed: 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 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/legendsbrowser -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #17 from Ben Rosser --- Thanks for the review! > have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359244 ? Taken; I'll take a look at it later today. -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #16 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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 226 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/gil/1359473-legendsbrowser/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[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.
[-]: 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:
[-]:
[Bug 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #15 from gil cattaneo --- have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359244 ? -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #14 from gil cattaneo --- Ok, thanks! should be mvn(org.javassist:javassist) because mvn(javassist:javassist) is an alias for backward compatibility -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #13 from Ben Rosser --- All of the above should now be fixed! I wrote a patch to stick the log and properties file in ~/.local/share/legendsbrowser/ and then modified the jpackage script using sed to try and create that directory if it does not already exist. Spec URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/legendsbrowser.spec SRPM URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/legendsbrowser-1.0.12-3.fc24.src.rpm There was another leaflet plugin (leaflet-minimap) that I added an additional bundled provides on, too. (Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be versioning information for either, so rpmlint is unhappy). - Fix versioning information; fontawesome fonts are under OFL. - Merge Java packaging fixes from gil (pom_xpath_remove and shorter jpackage_script). - Add missing Requires dependencies that are not automatically picked up. - Remove unnecessary buildrequires dependency on javapackages-tools. - Add patch to move log and properties files into ~/.local/share/legendsbrowser/. - Rewrote Source0 URL to include name-version instead of just version. - Add (unversioned) bundled provides on leaflet plugins. - Added license file to javadoc subpackage as well. -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo --- BuildRequires: ..., javapackages-tools is useless -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #11 from gil cattaneo --- ... and must be used license macro also in javadoc sub package if you want skip the generation of javadoc file pass this argument to %mvn_build -j -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473
--- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo ---
Sorry fot the noise. Please, use:
Source0:
https://github.com/robertjanetzko/LegendsBrowser/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
--
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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #9 from gil cattaneo --- (In reply to Ben Rosser from comment #8) > javassist does seem to be necessary on the %jpackage_script line in order > for it to launch and not crash. But if I'm reading the traceback generated > when it's *not* there correctly, this is because of reflections: > > https://paste.fedoraproject.org/397089/38725146/ > > https://github.com/robertjanetzko/LegendsBrowser/blob/master/src/main/java/ > legends/RequestThread.java#L53 yes is required. Please add as "Requires" if necessary > > i tried the launcher script but seem fail for unavailable > > > legendsbrowser.properties file > > another "problem" a log file is generated. should be in / var / tmp or temp > > > directory ... > > It creates legendsbrowser.properties in your current directory when first > ran if it's not there (and also the logfile in the same directory), so the > file being missing shouldn't be a problem. .properties seems to just store > the location legendsbrowser was last ran in and *should* really be in, say, > ~/.config/legendsbrowser/. > > It would be simple enough to patch the launcher script to run in another > directory, I guess, but then the log and properties file will still be > created together. Alternatively I guess the source (e.g. > https://github.com/robertjanetzko/LegendsBrowser/blob/ > 6ca346eed60cf1dd4e7d620503a16f537963edbc/src/main/java/legends/Application. > java#L26) could be patched to look for and create them in a different > place... what do you suggest? yes for avoid log and props files scattered / dispersed throughout the system :) > Once I fix this I'll repost the spec and srpm (with the above issues dealt > with too). seem you have missing "Provides: bundled(leaflet-opacity-controlsjs)" (the name ... ) https://github.com/lizardtechblog/Leaflet.OpacityControls -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #8 from Ben Rosser --- > see spec file attached added > Requires: mvn(commons-collections:commons-collections) > Requires: mvn(commons-lang:commons-lang) > because them are missing in classpath Oh, I see. Thanks for posting your updated spec! I'll add these Requires: to mine. > OFL: fontawesome-fonts-web (our spec file use this license) Oh. I skimmed right over the "Font licenses" part of the fontawesome license page for some reason; yes, it should indeed be OFL and not CC-BY. Thanks! > us really necessary javassist? javassist does seem to be necessary on the %jpackage_script line in order for it to launch and not crash. But if I'm reading the traceback generated when it's *not* there correctly, this is because of reflections: https://paste.fedoraproject.org/397089/38725146/ https://github.com/robertjanetzko/LegendsBrowser/blob/master/src/main/java/legends/RequestThread.java#L53 > i tried the launcher script but seem fail for unavailable > > legendsbrowser.properties file > another "problem" a log file is generated. should be in / var / tmp or temp > > directory ... It creates legendsbrowser.properties in your current directory when first ran if it's not there (and also the logfile in the same directory), so the file being missing shouldn't be a problem. .properties seems to just store the location legendsbrowser was last ran in and *should* really be in, say, ~/.config/legendsbrowser/. It would be simple enough to patch the launcher script to run in another directory, I guess, but then the log and properties file will still be created together. Alternatively I guess the source (e.g. https://github.com/robertjanetzko/LegendsBrowser/blob/6ca346eed60cf1dd4e7d620503a16f537963edbc/src/main/java/legends/Application.java#L26) could be patched to look for and create them in a different place... what do you suggest? Once I fix this I'll repost the spec and srpm (with the above issues dealt with too). -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #7 from gil cattaneo --- us really necessary javassist? i tried the launcher script but seem fail for unavailable legendsbrowser.properties file another "problem" a log file is generated. should be in / var / tmp or temp directory ... -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473
--- Comment #6 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Ben Rosser from comment #3)
> Thanks for taking a look! Updated source and spec, also some comments below:
>
> Spec URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/legendsbrowser.spec
> SRPM URL:
> https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/legendsbrowser-1.0.12-2.fc24.src.
> rpm
>
> > require are generate during the build
>
> My bad; for some reason, I assumed this was not the case. (This is my first
> Java package).
see spec file attached added
Requires: mvn(commons-collections:commons-collections)
Requires: mvn(commons-lang:commons-lang)
because them are missing in classpath
> > %dir %{_javadir}/%{name}
> > prevent duplicate file
> Is this no longer necessary? I was following this possibly obsolete document
> on Java packaging
> (https://fedorahosted.org/released/javapackages/doc/#maven) and it had a
> %dir file include of that form. Anyway, I commented it out in the updated
> spec.
yes is not necessary
> > Add for each single JS library or fonts : Provides: bundled(foo) =fooversion
>
> Whoops. Added this information, and updated license accordingly ("and BSD
> and CC-BY").
OFL: fontawesome-fonts-web (our spec file use this license)
> > Seem also which most of the java/source code are without license headers.
>
> > Please, ask to upstream to confirm the licensing of code and/or content/s,
> and add license headers
>
> I actually sort of have already have done so, although I did not ask for
> licensing headers-- prior to me filing
> https://github.com/robertjanetzko/LegendsBrowser/issues/9, upstream was not
> even distributing a LICENSE file or making any other reference to the
> license of the software that I could find (!). I can follow up though and
> verify that *all* the code that isn't third-party JS/CSS/fonts is indeed MIT
> if this is not sufficient.
--
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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo --- Created attachment 1185259 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1185259&action=edit log file -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo --- Created attachment 1185258 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1185258&action=edit spec file -- 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473
--- Comment #3 from Ben Rosser ---
Thanks for taking a look! Updated source and spec, also some comments below:
Spec URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/legendsbrowser.spec
SRPM URL:
https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/legendsbrowser-1.0.12-2.fc24.src.rpm
> require are generate during the build
My bad; for some reason, I assumed this was not the case. (This is my first
Java package).
> %dir %{_javadir}/%{name}
> prevent duplicate file
Is this no longer necessary? I was following this possibly obsolete document on
Java packaging (https://fedorahosted.org/released/javapackages/doc/#maven) and
it had a %dir file include of that form. Anyway, I commented it out in the
updated spec.
> Add for each single JS library or fonts : Provides: bundled(foo) =fooversion
Whoops. Added this information, and updated license accordingly ("and BSD and
CC-BY").
> Seem also which most of the java/source code are without license headers.
> Please, ask to upstream to confirm the licensing of code and/or content/s,
and add license headers
I actually sort of have already have done so, although I did not ask for
licensing headers-- prior to me filing
https://github.com/robertjanetzko/LegendsBrowser/issues/9, upstream was not
even distributing a LICENSE file or making any other reference to the license
of the software that I could find (!). I can follow up though and verify that
*all* the code that isn't third-party JS/CSS/fonts is indeed MIT if this is not
sufficient.
--
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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473 --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo --- Seem also which most of the java/source code are without license headers. Please, ask to upstream to confirm the licensing of code and/or content/s, and add license headers 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 1359473] Review Request: legendsbrowser - Java-based legends viewer for Dwarf Fortress
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359473
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||punto...@libero.it
--- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo ---
Please, remove useless
Requires: dom4j
Requires: junit
Requires: guava
Requires: reflections
Requires: velocity
Requires: apache-commons-logging, apache-commons-lang,
apache-commons-collections, apache-commons-cli
require are generate during the build
%dir %{_javadir}/%{name}
prevent duplicate file
Add for each single JS library or fonts : Provides: bundled(foo) =fooversion
where foo is jquery, bootstrap, leaflet, d3js, font-awesome,
glyphicons-halflings-regular
--
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
