[Bug 1316196] Review Request: shrinkwrap-resolver - ShrinkWrap Resolver

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316196

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |POST
           See Also|                            |https://bugzilla.redhat.com
                   |                            |/show_bug.cgi?id=829745
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+



--- Comment #8 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> ---
Side note: package was retired because it did not build for two releases. Now
it builds again, so that reason is gone. So that's good.

Summary is useless. Proposed replacement: Java API to obtain maven artifacts.
Summaries and %descriptions for the subpackages are all pretty bad:
- Summary should not repeat the package name or expand the abbreviations
- It should succinctly summarize the purpose of the package
- %description should say what the (sub)package is used for
- %description should be wrapped to ~72 columns

I'd suggest using "%global _docdir_fmt %{name}" to avoid a separate license dir
for each of the subpackages.

+ latest version
+ license is acceptable (ASL)
+ license file is present, %license is used
+ all subpackages have the license
+ package name follows guidelines
+ builds and installs OK
+ no scriptlets present or necessary
+ provides/requires look OK
+ standard maven build macros are used
- no %check, unfortunately

more interesting parts of fedora-review output:
Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
     Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It
     is pulled in by maven-local
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
     subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)

Maven:
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even
     when building with ant
[x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
     utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use .mfiles file list instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms

rpmlint:
16×no-documentation and bogus spelling-errors, all OK

Package is (RE-)APPROVED. Please improve the Summaries and %descriptions.

-- 
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]