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=610079 --- Comment #5 from Victor G. Vasilyev <victor.vasilyev@xxxxxxx> 2010-07-28 21:22:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > NEEDSWORK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. > > I am not sure how you got to "Version: 2.2". I couldn't find anything > in the archive/homepage suggesting that's the last version of the > package. This seems like the snapshot pre-release of version 0. So it > should be something like: > > Version: 0 The bundle version 2.2 is established in the bundle descriptor: http://www.osgi.org/svn/public/trunk/org.osgi.impl.bundle.bindex/bindex.bnd So, I'll use "Version: 2.2". > Release: 0.1.svn96%{?dist} Of course, it is more closer with the guidelines. But, seems, due to version 2.2 (i.e. it is not pre-release) I need use Release: 1.svn96%{?dist} > One way or the other it would be nice to get in touch with upstream > and get them to actually release versioned binary release > (e.g. bindex-%{version}.zip/tar.xx) I agree. I think, both moment and contents of the release is not clear if an archive of the upstream sources (not only versioned binary release!) is not published. I'll send a request to authors of the bindex program. > NEEDSWORK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. > > You define a LOT of macros that are only used once: > * svnRev/svnURL > * bnd > * installJAR > * rmFiles/rmFiles_lst > > Please don't do this, it just makes the spec file harder to read > without adding any benefit. I know it can be tempting to treat spec > file as a bash script, but think of it more as a "recipe" where you > just define the ingredients and few hints how to cook it :-) Make it > as simple as possible. OK. I've removed most of the macros, but I'd like to consider svnRev as a version: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_.25.7Bversion.7D > Plus one more thing. Instead of creating lnSysJar macro, use > build-classpath or build-classpath-directory commands. OK. The build-classpath is used instead. > I know it doesn't work well with renames when creating symlinks, > so maybe you would have to patch ... or something like that... I do not think that a patch makes the spec more clear, so I've decided to use %__ln_s with build-classpath instead. The next release is prepared for review: Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/bindex.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/bindex-2.2-1.svn96.fc14.src.rpm $ rpmlint SRPMS/bindex-2.2-1.svn96.fc14.src.rpm RPMS/noarch/bindex-2.2-1.svn96.fc14.noarch.rpm bindex.src: W: invalid-url Source0: bindex.r96.svn.tar.gz 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2356481 -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review