[Bug 227069] Review Request: jaxen-bootstrap-1.1-0.b7.3jpp - A convenience package for build of dom4j

[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: jaxen-bootstrap-1.1-0.b7.3jpp - A convenience package for build of dom4j


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227069


overholt at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |overholt at redhat.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review-




------- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat.com  2007-02-13 17:36 EST -------
MUST:
X package is named appropriately
 . release should be of the form 0.Z.tag.Xjpp.Y%{?dist}
* it is legal for Fedora to distribute this
X license field matches the actual license.
 . according to their website, it's Apache-style
* license is open source-compatible.
X specfile name matches %{name}
 . specfile should be jaxen-bootstrap.spec
X verify source and patches (md5sum matches upstream, know what the patches do)
 . where do the xsl and xml files come from?
 . we should note why dom4j is needed
* summary and description fine
X correct buildroot
 - should be:
   %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
X %{?dist} needs to be added
X license text included in package and marked with %doc
* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
X rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output

W: jaxen-bootstrap non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java

. fine

W: jaxen-bootstrap invalid-license Open Source

X fix this

W: jaxen-bootstrap unversioned-explicit-provides jaxen-bootstrap

. I think this is an unnecessary provide

W: jaxen-bootstrap rpm-buildroot-usage %prep rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT

. get rid of the rm -rf line at the beginning of prep ...

E: jaxen-bootstrap no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install

... and add it to the beginning of %install

W: jaxen-bootstrap mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 37)

X fix this (emacs M-x untabify)

* changelog in okay format
X Vendor tag should not be used
X Distribution tag should not be used
* use License and not Copyright 
* Summary tag should not end in a period
* no PreReqs
* specfile is legible
X package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86
 . I need xom to build this package
? BuildRequires are proper
 . I'll have to wait to build this to ensure this
* summary is a short and concise description of the package
* description expands upon summary
* make sure lines are <= 80 characters
* specfile written in American English
* no -doc sub-package necessary
* no libraries
* no rpath
* no config files
* not a GUI app
* no -devel sub-package necessary
* macros used appropriately and consistently
* does not use %makeinstall
* no locale data
? consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps (%prep line 4
* no Requires(pre,post)
* package is not be relocatable
* package contains code
* package owns all directories and files
* no %files duplicates
* file permissions okay; %defattrs present
* %clean present
* %doc files should not affect runtime (N/A until licence added)
* not a web app
X final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
 . remove unnecessary Provides: %{name}?
 . I will do the rest when I can build it
X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs
 . I will when I can build it

SHOULD:
X package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc
X package should build on i386
X package should build in mock


-- 
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.