Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Summary: Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: martin.gieseking@uos.de QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://mgieseki.fedorapeople.org/xqc/xqc.spec SRPM URL: http://mgieseki.fedorapeople.org/xqc/xqc-1.0-0.1.20101120svn.fc14.src.rpm
Description: The goal of the XQC project is to create standardized C/C++ APIs for interfacing with XQuery processors. They provide mechanisms to compile and execute XQueries, manage contexts, and provide a basic interface for the XQuery Data Model.
Note: This is a pretty small package that provides the xqc header file and some related documentation. Since both xqilla-devel and the Zorba XQuery processor (which I'm planning to package) rely on xqc, we need to get rid of the bundled xqc headers and provide a separate package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Jonathan Robie jonathan.robie@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jonathan.robie@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Robie jonathan.robie@redhat.com 2010-11-22 10:50:16 EST --- I support this change.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |658420
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |lemenkov@gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |lemenkov@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com 2011-01-11 01:47:59 EST --- I'll review it
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
--- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com 2011-01-11 04:03:04 EST --- Koji scratchbuild for Rawhide:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2714364
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com 2011-01-11 04:25:49 EST --- REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+/- rpmlint is almost silent
work ~: rpmlint Desktop/xqc-1.0-0.1.20101120svn.fc15.* xqc.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/xqc.h
^^^ this seems to be ok. This package contains only this file. Although I prefer that such packages should be named ad *-devel I have no strong opinion here.
xqc.src: W: invalid-url Source0: xqc.tar.gz
^^^ that's ok for development snapshots.
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. work ~:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. I have only two cosmetic suggestions:
* You may use svn export instead of svn co (you don't need to explicitly remove .svn case of using export) * Explicitly mentioning svn version in %version field sounds like a good idea.
These notes won't block the approval - feel free to ignore them.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (BSD). + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. See koji link above. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. 0 No need to handle locales. 0 No shared library files. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. + The package is not designed to be relocatable. + The package owns all directories that it creates. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. 0 No extremely large documentation files. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application.
+/- The package contains only one header file. Generally, we're placing such files into *-devel packages but IMO this is not the same case - *-devel packages are supplementary ones to the other rpms, which could be used standalone. So I don't think we need to create virtual provides or rename package here - this package is specifically designed to contain only header files.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files. 0 The package doesn't contain library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1). 0 No devel sub-package. + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. 0 Not a GUI application. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Ok, here is a summary:
* Please, consider my cosmetic notes above. * Regardless of the result of your consideration (these notes are just cosmetic ones), this package is
APPROVED.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
--- Comment #5 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de 2011-01-11 05:04:24 EST --- Thank you for the review and your notes, Peter. Much appreciated. I prefer to keep the package name "xqc" because this is the name of the upstream project, and "xqc-devel" might indicate that there must be a corresponding non-devel "xqc" package (just my impression).
I'll think about your other suggestions. Thanks again.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #6 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de 2011-01-11 06:04:19 EST --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: xqc Short Description: C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors Owners: mgieseki Branches: f13 f14 InitialCC:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
--- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2011-01-11 13:19:17 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11 14:28:59 EST --- xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc13
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11 14:29:06 EST --- xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc14
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2011-01-12 03:03:45
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-21 17:54:38 EST --- xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc | |14 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-21 18:07:02 EST --- xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc |xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc |14 |13
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org