[Bug 581164] Review Request: maven-timestamp-plugin - Provides formatted timestamps for maven builds

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=581164

--- Comment #5 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako at redhat.com> 2010-04-23 04:33:25 EDT ---
Review:

OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
Rpmlint output:
maven-timestamp-plugin.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) timestamps -> time
stamps, time-stamps, times tamps
maven-timestamp-plugin.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
maven-timestamp-plugin-1.0.tar.xz
maven-timestamp-plugin-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US)
Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Javanese

These are false positives.


OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. 
OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Instructions for the tarball creation included in the
spec file.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. 
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a
directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that
directory.
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line. 
OK: Each package must consistently use macros. 
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. There is a javadoc
package with the programing documentation.
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. 
NOT OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. Do not own 
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
%config(noreplace) %{_mavendepmapfragdir}
 instead own the files in them i.e.
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms/*
%{_mavendepmapfragdir}/*
I've also remove the config(noreplace) part because it's plain wrong for
depmaps despite the rpmlint warning.

OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. 

There is just a small problem that the package owns directories owned by other
packages. Once this is fixed it's good to go.

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