Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: isorelax-0.1-0.20041111.2jpp - Public interfaces useful for applications to support RELAX Core https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227061 overholt@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review- ------- Additional Comments From overholt@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-12 16:22 EST ------- Things marked with an X need to be fixed. MUST: * package is named appropriately * it is legal for Fedora to distribute this * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. X specfile name matches %{name} . the specfile needs to be isorelax.spec X verify source and patches . we need to add the following: # mkdir isorelax-release-20050331-src # cd isorelax-release-20050331-src # cvs -d:pserver:anonymous@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:/cvsroot/iso-relax \ # export -r release-20050331 src lib # cvs -d:pserver:anonymous@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:/cvsroot/iso-relax \ # co -r release-20050331 build.xml # cd .. # tar cjf isorelax-release-20050331-src.tar.bz2 isorelax-release-20050331-src X the description should be fixed to not be from the author's point of view X correct buildroot - should be: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) - this won't hold up the review, though, as there's currently a discussion regarding buildroots going on X release tag . we need to fix the release tag to be of the form 0.Z.<tag>.Xjpp.Y%{?dist} X license text included in package and marked with %doc . upstream does not include their license in CVS * packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) X rpmlint on isorelax srpm gives this output W: isorelax non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java . can be ignored W: isorelax unversioned-explicit-obsoletes isorelax-bootstrap W: isorelax unversioned-explicit-provides isorelax-bootstrap . I think we should just remove those virtual obsoletes/provides as they've never been shipped in Fedora. W: isorelax setup-not-quiet . I think it's the cat. That should just be in a comment, I think. E: isorelax no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install . add rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT to the beginning of %install W: isorelax mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 38) . the easiest way to fix this is to run with emacs and do M-x untabify * changelog is in acceptable format * Packager tag should not be used X Vendor tag should not be used . remove Vendor . remove Distribution * use License and not Copyright * Summary tag does not end in a period * no PreReq * specfile is legible * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86 ? BuildRequires are proper . I'm not sure about this one. I guess we should verify if one of the packages that BRs this builds okay. * summary should be a short and concise description of the package * description expands upon summary (don't include installation instructions) * make sure lines are <= 80 characters * specfile written in American English * make a -doc sub-package if necessary * no static libraries * no rpath * no config files * not a GUI app * no need for a -devel sub-package? * macros used appropriately and consistently * no locale data * package is not relocatable * package contains code * package owns all directories and files * no %files duplicates * file permissions okay; %defattrs present * %clean is present * %doc files do not affect runtime * not a webapp * verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs * final provides and requires are sane: X rpmlint on the binary RPMs: . package doesn't build on i386 11. ERROR in /home/andrew/rpmbuild/BUILD/isorelax-0.1/src/org/iso_relax/jaxp/ValidatingDocumentBuilderFactory.java (at line 15) public class ValidatingDocumentBuilderFactory extends DocumentBuilderFactory ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The type ValidatingDocumentBuilderFactory must implement the inherited abstract method DocumentBuilderFactory.setFeature(String, boolean) ---------- 12. ERROR in /home/andrew/rpmbuild/BUILD/isorelax-0.1/src/org/iso_relax/jaxp/ValidatingDocumentBuilderFactory.java (at line 15) public class ValidatingDocumentBuilderFactory extends DocumentBuilderFactory ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The type ValidatingDocumentBuilderFactory must implement the inherited abstract method DocumentBuilderFactory.getFeature(String) SHOULD: X package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc . upstream does not do this X package should build on i386 . nope (see above) X package should build in mock . didn't try -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review