[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-06-19 20:36:07 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- jra-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- jra-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 --- Comment #6 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com --- Patryk, could you please build the package and submit for Fedora 17? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- jra-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jra-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 --- Comment #2 from Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com --- Release tag fixed, thanks for spotting this :) Spec URL: http://dreamertan.fedorapeople.org/srpm/jra/1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17/jra.spec SRPM URL: http://dreamertan.fedorapeople.org/srpm/jra/1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17/jra-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com --- Looks good. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4110084 *** APPROVED *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jra Short Description: Java REST Annotations Owners: dreamertan Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330
--- Comment #1 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[X] Rpmlint output:
SPECS/jra.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: jra-1.0-alpha-4.tar.xz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
jra.src: W: invalid-url Source0: jra-1.0-alpha-4.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
jra-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs - Java docs,
Java-docs, Avocados
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 2.0
[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] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: 466b79ad82a79567eb443243ea227443
MD5SUM upstream package: 50b3096890ff43605ce749430571fa7e
SVN export, ok.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[x] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4100515
=== Issues ===
1. Release tag is wrong. This is an alpha version, not final.
Release: 0.1.alpha4%{?dist}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824330] Review request: jra - Java REST Annotations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824330 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgold...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
