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=527492 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-11-04 14:41:03 EDT --- I don't normally review Java packages since I know very little about them. However, this has been sitting around for so long and the Java SIG folks are busy, so even though there's no possibility for me to test this, I'll review it. Builds fine (on F14 since rawhide is hosed today), rpmlint is silent. There's some stuff that's unnecessary on modern Fedora releases (BuildRoot:, buildroot cleaning in %install, the %clean section) which you can remove if you like. Of course, you can't if you intend to target EPEL with the same spec. Otherwise, I see no issues. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: a0f367f1103208e767b3e32e981ee4cdcc62f998cef1c455c11ac093288275b9 jilter-1.2-src.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (f14, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: jilter-1.2-2.fc14.noarch.rpm jilter = 1.2-2.fc14 = java jpackage-utils log4j jilter-javadoc-1.2-2.fc14.noarch.rpm jilter-javadoc = 1.2-2.fc14 = jpackage-utils * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files (except for the license text) * file permissions are appropriate. * code, not content. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. Java-specific bits: * no pre-built jars * single jar, named after the package * jarfiles are under _javadir. * javadocs are under _javadocdir. * ant called properly. * no wrapper script necessary. * gcj not called. APPROVED -- 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