Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request:vafer-jdependency - This project provides an API to analyse class dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=643017
Summary: Review Request:vafer-jdependency - This project provides an API to analyse class dependencies Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pingou@pingoured.fr QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/vafer-jdependency.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/vafer-jdependency-0.6-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: jdependency is small library that helps you analyze class level dependencies, clashes and missing classes.
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=643017
Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mefoster@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com 2010-10-14 09:28:44 EDT --- *** Bug 532532 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
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=643017
Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |akurtako@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |akurtako@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com 2010-10-14 09:53:05 EDT --- There is no more vafer in this project. Please name it properly - jdependency. And I'm taking this one.
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=643017
--- Comment #3 from Pierre-YvesChibon pingou@pingoured.fr 2010-10-14 10:04:00 EDT --- Spec: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/jdependency.spec SRPM: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/jdependency-0.6-2.fc13.src.rpm
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=643017
Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review |Review Request:jdependency |Request:vafer-jdependency - |- This project provides an |This project provides an |API to analyse class |API to analyse class |dependencies |dependencies |
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=643017
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com 2010-10-15 03:30:52 EDT --- Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS === [X] Rpmlint output: jdependency.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) analyse -> analyst, analyze, ana lyse jdependency.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/jdependency Not a problem. [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 is correct (%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)) [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. [!] All independent sub-packages have license of their own Javadoc subpackage should install doc because it doesn't depend on [X] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5]. Maven and plugins are missing as build requires. [X] Package must own all directories that it creates. [X] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [X] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [X] Permissions on files are set properly. [X] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [X] Package consistently uses macros. [X] Package contains code, or permissable content. [-] 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] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils [X] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils [-] 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.
=== 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 [-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven2.jpp.depmap.file=*" explain why it's needed in a comment [X] Package uses %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun [X] Packages 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] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version} with %{_javadocdir}/%{name} symlink [X] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}-%{version}.jar with %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (unversioned) symlink [X] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant [X] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary [X] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible) [X] Latest version is packaged.
=== Issues === 1. Missing license in javadoc subpackage. 2. Missing BRs on maven plugins 3. Old name of jakarta-commons-io used should be apache-commons-io now.
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=643017
--- Comment #5 from Pierre-YvesChibon pingou@pingoured.fr 2010-10-15 03:52:00 EDT --- Thanks for the review, there is the new version with the required changes.
Spec: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/jdependency.spec SRPM: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/jdependency-0.6-3.fc13.src.rpm
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=643017
Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com 2010-10-15 03:54:54 EDT --- Thanks,
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=643017
Pierre-YvesChibon pingou@pingoured.fr changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Pierre-YvesChibon pingou@pingoured.fr 2010-10-15 03:59:49 EDT --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: jdependency Short Description: This project provides an API to analyse class dependencies Owners: pingou Branches: F-14 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=643017
--- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2010-10-16 17:21:03 EDT --- 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=643017
Pierre-YvesChibon pingou@pingoured.fr changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2010-10-22 10:40:57
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org