Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: jglobus - Globus Java client libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812751
Summary: Review Request: jglobus - Globus Java client libraries Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: ---
Spec URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/jglobus.spec SRPM URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/jglobus-2.0.4-1.fc17.src.rpm
Description: jglobus is a collection of Java client libraries for Globus Toolkit security, GRAM and GridFTP.
Note that this can only be built on Fedora 17 or later due to missing dependencies in earlier releases (springframework).
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=812751
--- Comment #1 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se 2012-04-16 09:50:35 EDT --- Successful koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3993372
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=812751
Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |brendan.jones.it@gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |brendan.jones.it@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2012-04-21 17:15:58 EDT --- I'll take this on
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=812751
--- Comment #3 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2012-04-22 03:34:16 EDT --- Hi Mattias
I'have had a quick look and come up with a few things:
- use %{name} macros in URL,Sources, Description tags - comment explaining patches - jglobus-2.0.4/ssl-proxies/src/main/java/org/globus/tools/GridCertRequest.java license is MIT - where can I find where the license file is packaged? It either needs to be in a base package that all subpackages require, or copied into each /usr/share/doc for each subpackage.
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=812751
--- Comment #4 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2012-04-22 03:54:48 EDT ---
We are looking pretty good here. Just need a clarification on the license,
Package Review ==============
Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Rpmlint output: jglobus.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus.src: W: invalid-url Source0: jglobus-2.0.4.tar.gz jglobus-gram.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-gram.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-gram.noarch: W: no-documentation jglobus-gridftp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-gridftp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-gridftp.noarch: W: no-documentation jglobus-gss.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-gss.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-gss.noarch: W: no-documentation jglobus-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados jglobus-jsse.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-jsse.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-jsse.noarch: W: no-documentation jglobus-ssl-proxies.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-ssl-proxies.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Globus -> Globs, Globes, Glob's jglobus-ssl-proxies.noarch: W: no-documentation 7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 18 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. [!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2]. See comment 3 [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms. [x] Buildroot definition is not present [!] 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]. See Comment 3 [!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: [!] 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. (if there is a license in the source or generated we should include it) [!] 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. Git OK MD5SUM this package : MD5SUM upstream package: [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) [!] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT mixing) (See comment 3) [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 [x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils [x] Package uses %global not %define [x] 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 [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 [x] 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.
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=812751
--- Comment #5 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se 2012-04-23 07:31:07 EDT --- The packaging guidelines say:
"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."
There is no separate license text file in the git checkout, only license statements in the source files. The guideline above says that the packager should not create one if it is missing.
It was well spotted to find that one of the source file had a different license than all the others. I have changed the specfile accordingly.
I have also changed to use macros in more places than before, as requested.
http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/jglobus-2.0.4-2.fc17.src.rpm http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/jglobus.spec
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=812751
Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2012-04-23 07:42:33 EDT --- Thanks for clarifying. This package is 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=812751
Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se 2012-04-23 18:16:08 EDT --- Many thanks for the review.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: jglobus Short Description: Globus Java client libraries Owners: ellert Branches: f17 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=812751
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-04-24 08:49:11 EDT --- 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=812751
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
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=812751
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-24 11:18:45 EDT --- jglobus-2.0.4-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jglobus-2.0.4-2.fc17
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=812751
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-25 00:47:41 EDT --- jglobus-2.0.4-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.
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=812751
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |jglobus-2.0.4-2.fc17 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2012-05-02 16:49:46
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2012-05-02 16:49:46 EDT --- jglobus-2.0.4-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812751
Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #12 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se --- Requesting EPEL branches.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: jglobus Short Description: Globus Java client libraries Owners: ellert Branches: el5 el6 InitialCC:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812751
--- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Misformatted request.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812751
Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #14 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ellert@fysast.uu.se --- Requesting EPEL branches.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: jglobus Owners: ellert Branches: el5 el6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812751
--- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla