[Bug 847160] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-core - Maven integration for Eclipse

Tue Jan 22 17:32:18 UTC 2013

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847160

--- Comment #17 from Juan Hernández <juan.hernandez at redhat.com> ---
Package Review
==============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!]  Rpmlint output:

Output of rpmlint of the source package:

eclipse-m2e-core.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, ml, x
ml
eclipse-m2e-core.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://git.eclipse.org/c/m2e/m2e-core.git/snapshot/1.2.0.20120903-1050.tar.bz2
HTTP Error 404: Not found
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

The spelling warning is acceptable.

It looks like the URL has changed and is this one now:

http://git.eclipse.org/c/m2e/m2e-core.git/snapshot/m2e-core-releases/1.2/1.2.0.20120903-1050.tar.bz2

Output of rpmlint of the binary packages:

rpmlint eclipse-m2e-core-1.2.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm
eclipse-m2e-core-javadoc-1.2.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm
eclipse-m2e-core.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency cglib
eclipse-m2e-core.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML,
ml, x ml
eclipse-m2e-core-javadoc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/javadoc/eclipse-m2e-core/javadoc.sh
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 73 warnings.

(I ommited many warnings about dangling symlinks caused by missing Java
packages in the environment where I ran rpmlint)

The error about the explicit lib dependency on cglib is a false positive, as
cglib is not a library but a regular Java package.

The spelling warning is acceptable.

The error related to the javadoc.sh script can be fixed excluding that file
from the package.

[x]  Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x]  Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]  Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x]  Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.

Built in koji:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4894325

[x]  Buildroot definition is not present
[x]  Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x]  License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type:
[x]  If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x]  All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x]  Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]  Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.

Checked using a recursive diff of the sources in the package and the sources
downloaded from the source URL.

[x]  All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x]  Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x]  Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]  File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x]  Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]  Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x]  Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x]  Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-]  Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-]  Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x]  Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]  Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x]  Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x]  Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[!]  Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x]  Package uses %global not %define
[-]  If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[!]  If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building

The following .jar files need to be removed before building:

org.eclipse.m2e.launching/org.eclipse.m2e.cliresolver30.jar
org.eclipse.m2e.launching/org.eclipse.m2e.cliresolver.jar
org.eclipse.m2e.tests.common/jars/jetty-util-6.1.22.jar
org.eclipse.m2e.tests.common/jars/jetty-6.1.22.jar
org.eclipse.m2e.tests.common/jars/servlet-api-2.5-20081211.jar

[x]  All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x]  Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)

Jar files are installed not installed to %{_javadir}, but to the Eclipse
plugins directory and this is expected and acceptable.

[!]  If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[!]  pom files has correct add_maven_depmap

Not sure if this is a hard requirement for Eclipse releated packages.

=== Maven ===
[-]  Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-]  If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-]  If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven.local.depmap.file=*" explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x]  Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]  Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro

=== Other suggestions ===
[x]  If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x]  Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x]  Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x]  Latest version is packaged.
[x]  Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.

Tested in Koji:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4894325

=== Issues ===
1. Apparently the URL of the source has changed, please review and fix it if
needed.
2. Don't include the javadoc.sh script in the package.
3. Add the jpackage-utils requirement to the javadoc package.
4. Remove the .jar files included in the tarball before building.
5. Install the POM files (I am not sure this is mandatory for Eclipse related
packages).

=== Final Notes ===
Address the issues above and I will review again. Thanks for your work Gerard!

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 
[6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Filenames

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QvKsZZtSIm&a=cc_unsubscribe