[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 Nathan Scott changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG), ||1429804 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1429804 [Bug 1429804] Review Request: parfait - Java libraries for Performance Co-Pilot (PCP) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 Jonny Heggheim changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1434749 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434749 [Bug 1434749] Review Request: si-units - International System of Units (JSR 363) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 Dave Brolley changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|brol...@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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 --- Comment #1 from Lukas Berk --- Updated SPEC: https://bintray.com/pcp/f26/download_file?file_path=uom-se.spec Updated SRPM: https://bintray.com/pcp/f26/download_file?file_path=uom-se-1.0.4-3.fc26.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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 Lukas Berk changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Lukas Berk --- 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: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 30 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/lberk/src/fedora- scm/review/review-uom-se/licensecheck.txt Reviewing these unknown files: There are a variety of internalization property files, META-INF files and config files I wouldn't expect to include licenses. Multiple .java source code files which do contain proper licensing (which I'm not sure why fedora-review didn't pick up as BSD-3), as well as the pom.xml and readme which also contain mention of the proper license. Passing this section. [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. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: 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. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: 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: No rpmlint messages. [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- u
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 Lukas Berk changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|brol...@redhat.com |lb...@redhat.com -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 --- Comment #3 from Ralph Bean --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/uom-se -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 --- Comment #4 from Ralph Bean --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/uom-se -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 Mat Booth 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746 Nathan Scott changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2017-09-01 04:11:52 -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org