[Bug 475603] Review Request: jFormatString - Java format string compile-time checker

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=475603


Andrew Overholt <overholt@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |overholt@xxxxxxxxxx




--- Comment #1 from Andrew Overholt <overholt@xxxxxxxxxx>  2009-03-04 08:44:29 EDT ---
I'll take this one.  I'm still working on a full review, but here are some
initial questions:

rpmlint complains about a few things with the SRPM:

$ rpmlint jFormatString-0-0.1.20081016svn.src.rpm 
jFormatString.src:104: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package %{_libdir}/gcj/%{name}
jFormatString.src: W: non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
jFormatString.src: W: non-coherent-filename
jFormatString-0-0.1.20081016svn.src.rpm
jFormatString-0-0.1.20081016svn.fc10.src.rpm
jFormatString.src: W: strange-permission jFormatString-0.tar.bz2 0745
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.

and a few things with the resulting RPMs:

$ rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/jFormatString-*
jFormatString.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
jFormatString-javadoc.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

I suggest just picking Groups to make rpmlint quiet.

The license field is correct but I would like spot to weigh in on their
statement:

"The library produced by compiling this project is used by the FindBugs
project. To avoid any licensing questions due to incompatible licenses
(FindBugs is licensed under the LGPL), it is broken out as a separate project.
While there may be some confusion/discussion about the licenses, the FindBugs
project does not interprete the FindBugs LGPL license to be any stronger than
GPL v2 + the Classpath exception."

spot, what do you think?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]