[Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: itext - a PDF creation library in java


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981


chabotc at xs4all.nl changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |chabotc at xs4all.nl
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl  2006-01-16 17:43 EST -------
Picking this one up on green's request, changing to FE-REVIEW. Green please
assign the bug to me?

rpmlint on the itext packages shows:

W: itext non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
W: itext-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
W: itext-manual non-standard-group Development/Documentation

Please pick one of FE's standard groups:  
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups

Development/Libraries and Documentation seem to be the proper 2 to choose

W: itext-manual invalid-license Mozilla Public License & LGPL
W: itext invalid-license Mozilla Public License & LGPL
W: itext-javadoc invalid-license Mozilla Public License & LGPL
Ignorable error,licence is valid and fedora compatible

W: itext incoherent-version-in-changelog 0:1.3-1jpp_3fc 1.3-1jpp_3
Please correct this, versions have to be the same, please remove the 'fc' part
from the changelog

W: itext-javadoc dangerous-command-in-%post rm
%post javadoc does confuse me, the scripplet:
  rm -f %{_javadocdir}/%{name}                                                 
                          
  ln -s %{name}-%{version} %{_javadocdir}/%{name}

What are you trying to do here, isn't there a way to get the file locations
correct in the %install without doing dangerous rm's and confusing links (with
then not-owned) to directories? On removing this package this will result into a
dead link

W: itext wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/lgpl.txt
W: itext wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/MPL-1.1.txt
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/lgpl.txt
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/build.xml
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/MPL-1.1.txt
W: itext-manual hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/.ant.properties
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/.ant.properties
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/download.xml
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/site.xml
E: itext-manual standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/doc
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/release.xml
W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/compile.xml
This is the same error as in rssowl, please add dos2unix to the
BuildRequirements, and dos2unix them in the %install section.

I agree with katz that the jpp in the version is not elegant, but looking at the
standard FC development repo, it seems all java packages/libraries suffer from
this, so i guess its consitent in its own way :-)

Identation of the header part seems very confusing, your mixing tabs and spaces
i think, and my tabsize (4) is probably not the same as yours, please use spaces
instead of tabs, it avoids such confusion.

Would it maybe be an idea to combine the javadoc and manual packages? Normally
documentation is in the -devel package, but seeing how this has none thats not
an option. However having 2 'doc' packages seems a bit to much to me (but i have
no inside knowledge of these docs, so if there are very good reasons then thats
acceptable, but please put them in a comment in the specfile please)

I'll post the whole formal review list once these issues are addressed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.