Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: guessencoding - Guess encoding of files and return configured reader
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638786
Summary: Review Request: guessencoding - Guess encoding of files and return configured reader Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: orion@cora.nwra.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/guessencoding.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/guessencoding-1.2-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: The purpose of this library is to "guess" the encoding of files, and retrieve a reader that is properly configured to use the right encoding as guessed. The library is able to recognize the various Unicode encoding variants:
* UTF-8 * UTF-16LE - Low Endian * UTF-16BE - Big Endian * UTF-32
If a Unicode encoding isn't recognized, it's an 8-bit encoding. If the 8-bit encoding is not US-ASCII, the default platform 8-bit encoding is assumed whatever it is. However, the library cannot guess between different 8-bit encodings. Only statistical analysis, n-grams and similar techniques specific to each language used in those files can help guessing the encoding, but this is not supported by the library.
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=638786
Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |652183(FE-JAVASIG)
--- Comment #1 from Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 2011-10-21 17:40:28 EDT --- http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/guessencoding.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/guessencoding-1.2-1.fc16.src.rpm
* Fri Oct 21 2011 Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 1.2-2 - Update for maven 3
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=638786
--- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 2011-10-21 18:02:18 EDT --- http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/guessencoding.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/guessencoding-1.4-1.fc16.src.rpm
* Fri Oct 21 2011 Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 1.4-1 - Update to 1.4 - Update for maven 3
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=638786
Tomas Radej tradej@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |tradej@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |tradej@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Tomas Radej tradej@redhat.com 2011-11-04 09:40:35 EDT --- I take this.
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=638786
--- Comment #4 from Tomas Radej tradej@redhat.com 2011-11-14 12:51:50 EST --- Package Review ==============
Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Rpmlint output: guessencoding.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US encodings -> encoding, encoding s, recordings guessencoding.noarch: W: no-documentation guessencoding.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US encodings -> encoding, encoding s, recordings guessencoding.src: W: invalid-url Source0: guessencoding-1.4.tar.gz guessencoding-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
[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. [!] Buildroot definition is not present << BuildRoot def is 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: ASL 2.0 [-] 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. [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. [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [!] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with good reason [x] Permissions on files are set properly. [!] 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 [!] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks) << Folder copied is apidocs, should apidocs/* [x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils [x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils [-] 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, ...) << Should contain line # tar caf guessencoding-1.4.tar.gz guessencoding-1.4 [-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be removed prior to building [x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details) [x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant [x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven === [x] 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.
*** ISSUES *** - BuildRoot def is present - DefAttr is present - Clean section is present - Folder copied is apidocs, should apidocs/* - Should contain line # tar caf guessencoding-1.4.tar.gz guessencoding-1.4
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=638786
--- Comment #5 from Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 2011-11-14 13:04:57 EST --- (In reply to comment #4)
*** ISSUES ***
- Folder copied is apidocs, should apidocs/*
Nope, this is correct. Others fixed:
* Mon Nov 14 2011 Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 1.4-2 - Drop BuildRoot, defattr, clean - Add comment for tar generation
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=638786
Tomas Radej tradej@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Tomas Radej tradej@redhat.com 2011-11-16 03:39:27 EST --- Funny, other packages gave me a wrong path when copying apidocs. This one does not do that, mea culpa.
*** APPROVED ***
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=638786
Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 2011-11-16 11:13:10 EST --- Thanks for the review
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: guessencoding Short Description: Guess encoding of files and return configured reader Owners: orion Branches: f15 f16 el6 InitialCC:
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=638786
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-11-16 11:32:03 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
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=638786
Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2011-11-16 11:46:56
--- Comment #9 from Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com 2011-11-16 11:46:56 EST --- Checked in and built.
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=638786
Alexander Kurtakov akurtako@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |akurtako@redhat.com Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) |
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org