[Bug 1029142] Review Request: amplab-tachyon - Reliable File Sharing at Memory Speed Across Cluster Frameworks

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1029142



--- Comment #9 from Matthew Farrellee <matt@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Timothy St. Clair from comment #8)
> In Order: 
> 
> >[X]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
> >     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
> >     "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 21 files have unknown license.
> >     Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/1029142-amplab-
> >     tachyon/licensecheck.txt
> > REVIEW NOTE: 21 files w/ unknown license are generated by the Thrift Compiler
> 
> Expected.  Thrift re-generation is done due to upstream version mismatch.
> 
> >[X]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
> >     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/systemd/system,
> >     /usr/lib/systemd, /var/lib/tachyon, /etc/tmpfiles.d
> > REVIEW NOTE: AFAIK no dep is required on systemd itself, which provides these >dirs.
> 
> I don't exactly know what you are trying to say here.  I adhered to the
> policies outlined here:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd

Just notes to myself, or other reviewers.



> >[!]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
> > REVIEW COMMENT: %name and ${name} used, pick one
> 
> All .spec elements use either %{name} or reference variable %{shortname}. 
> This is done b/c of namespace collision with existing packages. 

At least _sysconfdir shows up as %_sysconfdir and %{_sysconfdir}


> >[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> >     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in amplab-
> >     tachyon-javadoc
> 
> Not applicable in this space.  Typically compat packages are explicitly
> specified in the java space.  

Ok.


> > [!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
> > REVIEW COMMENT: Not present, please justify
> 
> This is typically not done in java packaging because (%mvn_build) by default
> runs the unit tests for a java package.  e.g. It's not standard practice in
> the java space for Fedora 19 & >.
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Apache_Maven)

Ok

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





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