[Bug 600154] New: Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600154

Summary: Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus
                    Security Dispatcher Component
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
    Classification: Fedora
    Target Release: ---

Spec URL:
http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/plexus-sec-dispatcher/plexus-sec-dis...
SRPM URL:
http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/plexus-sec-dispatcher/plexus-sec-dis...
Description: Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

Scratch built in koji:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2228891

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

huwang  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

huwang  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

Alexander Kurtakov  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
         AssignedTo|[e-mail]    |[e-mail]
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov  2010-06-04 04:15:10 EDT ---
I'll take this one.

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov  2010-06-04 04:17:50 EDT ---
Review:
FIXIT: rpmlint must be run on every package. Output:
plexus-sec-dispatcher.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
http://spice.sonatype.org/$%7Bproject.artifactId%7D HTTP Error 404: Not Found
Please put a real working url here.

plexus-sec-dispatcher.noarch: W: no-documentation
plexus-sec-dispatcher.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/maven/fragments/plexus-sec-dispatcher

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: 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 must be included in %doc.
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. 
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. 
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. 
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

Please fix the URL and the package is good to go.

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

--- Comment #3 from huwang  2010-06-04 04:57:38 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Review:
> FIXIT: rpmlint must be run on every package. Output:
> plexus-sec-dispatcher.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
> http://spice.sonatype.org/$%7Bproject.artifactId%7D HTTP Error 404: Not Found
> Please put a real working url here.
>
> plexus-sec-dispatcher.noarch: W: no-documentation
> plexus-sec-dispatcher.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
> /etc/maven/fragments/plexus-sec-dispatcher
>
> 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: 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 must be included in %doc.
> 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. 
> 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. 
> OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
> the application. 
> OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 
> OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
>
> Please fix the URL and the package is good to go.

Fixed. Please review again, thanks.
Spec URL:
http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/plexus-sec-dispatcher/plexus-sec-dis...
SRPM URL:
http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/plexus-sec-dispatcher/plexus-sec-dis...
Scratch built in koji :
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2229266

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

Alexander Kurtakov  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

--- Comment #4 from Alexander Kurtakov  2010-06-04 05:07:17 EDT ---
Thanks,
This package is APPROVED.

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

--- Comment #5 from huwang  2010-06-04 06:04:11 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: plexus-sec-dispatcher
Short Description: Plexus Security Dispatcher Component
Owners: huwang
Branches: 
InitialCC:

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

huwang  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |fedora-cvs?

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

--- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi  2010-06-07 17:12:00 EDT ---
CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).

[Bug 600154] Review Request: plexus-sec-dispatcher - Plexus Security Dispatcher Component

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=600154

huwang  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |NEXTRELEASE

--- Comment #7 from huwang  2010-06-08 04:10:26 EDT ---
Built in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=177242