I'm interested in swapping reviews. I've currently got 3 packages awaiting review. The first 2 are prerequisites for findbugs, which I hope to package up once these are in (modulo my ability to deal with findbugs' modified version of BCEL). The third one is a prerequisite for several other packages, such as nutch [1] and choco [2].
262401, jcip-annotations: A set of Java annotations for describing multithreaded properties 285551, idw-gpl: A Swing-based docking windows framework 394871, automaton: a Java finite state automata / regular expression library
Thanks!
Footnotes: [1] http://www.nutch.org/ [2] http://choco-solver.net/
"JJ" == Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com writes:
JJ> I'm interested in swapping reviews. I've currently got 3 packages JJ> awaiting review.
One problem is that they all seem to be Java packages, and we still neither have Java packaging guidelines nor anyone willing sufficiently understanding of Java packaging to help write them.
If you'd be willing to help, please let me know. I'm willing to help with packaging committee stuff (and I'll help review your packages) but I just don't understand Java well enough to write guidelines.
- J<
On 07 Jan 2008 17:03:10 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III tibbs@math.uh.edu wrote:
One problem is that they all seem to be Java packages, and we still neither have Java packaging guidelines nor anyone willing sufficiently understanding of Java packaging to help write them.
If you'd be willing to help, please let me know. I'm willing to help with packaging committee stuff (and I'll help review your packages) but I just don't understand Java well enough to write guidelines.
I don't know that I'm sufficiently experienced with Java packaging to be helpful, but I've had a lot of experience with pedanticalness. Surely that qualifies me for writing guidelines! :-)
Seriously, though, I'll be happy to give whatever help I can. I can start by reviewing both the Java-related material on the wiki and whatever guidelines I can find on jpackage.org. Has anybody compiled any kind of list of problems encountered with Java packages?
"JJ" == Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com writes:
JJ> I don't know that I'm sufficiently experienced with Java packaging JJ> to be helpful, but I've had a lot of experience with JJ> pedanticalness. Surely that qualifies me for writing guidelines! JJ> :-)
Yes, we on the packaging committee are positiviously ecstaticised by pedanticalosity.
I guess what needs to happen, in the absence of the board persuading Red Hat management to allocate a few Java-wizard-hours, is that those who know just enough to be dangerous work on a few packages, hammer out some potentially dumb guidelines, beg for answers to the tough questions from folks who understand them. And finally, be prepared to quite possibly be flamed for making a set of bad guidelines by people who might just spend more time composing the flames than they would have spent helping us write guidelines they wouldn't have felt the need to flame.
So I'll be the reviewer. I'll need two or three simple packages and one more complicated one, preferably by multiple submitters who are willing to respond to input, plus some packages already in the distro to look at. Obviously that includes at least one of yours. From there we can get a handle on what these packages need to do, where files need to go, and what rpmlint complaints come up.
This is almost certainly an after-fudcon thing, unless some folks at fudcon want to sit down and bang something out.
- J<
On 08 Jan 2008 09:51:51 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III tibbs@math.uh.edu wrote:
Yes, we on the packaging committee are positiviously ecstaticised by pedanticalosity.
I guess what needs to happen, in the absence of the board persuading Red Hat management to allocate a few Java-wizard-hours, is that those who know just enough to be dangerous work on a few packages, hammer out some potentially dumb guidelines, beg for answers to the tough questions from folks who understand them. And finally, be prepared to quite possibly be flamed for making a set of bad guidelines by people who might just spend more time composing the flames than they would have spent helping us write guidelines they wouldn't have felt the need to flame.
I've banged out some bad guidelines for Haskell packaging. Is there anyone who wants to help review them, or just plain flame them to shreds?
-Yaakov
"YN" == Yaakov Nemoy loupgaroublond@gmail.com writes:
YN> I've banged out some bad guidelines for Haskell packaging.
It would help to have a copy of these in the wiki (and the URL, of course).
The packaging committee wil meet January 22nd so we can discuss it then but it would be good to have a look well before then.
- J<
On 09 Jan 2008 20:58:54 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III tibbs@math.uh.edu wrote:
"YN" == Yaakov Nemoy loupgaroublond@gmail.com writes:
YN> I've banged out some bad guidelines for Haskell packaging.
It would help to have a copy of these in the wiki (and the URL, of course).
The packaging committee wil meet January 22nd so we can discuss it then but it would be good to have a look well before then.
Oh, sorry, here they are,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GoodHaskellSupport http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Haskell
-Yaakov