[Bug 191015] New: Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

Summary: Review Request: javasvn
           Product: Fedora Extras
           Version: devel
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: normal
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]

Spec URL: http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...
SRPM URL: http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...
Description: JavaSVN is a pure Java Subversion client library. You would like to use JavaSVN when
you need to access or modify Subversion repository from your Java application, be it
a standalone program, plugin or web application. Being a pure Java program, JavaSVN
doesn't need any additional configuration or native binaries to work on any OS that
runs Java

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  BugsThisDependsOn|                            |191014

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |191016
              nThis|                            |

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |191017
              nThis|                            |

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-28 19:58 EST -------
Updated files

http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...
http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-05 02:37 EST -------
This not a review but some comments on SPEC file
rpmlint on your source rpm returns
W: javasvn summary-not-capitalized a pure Java Subversion client library
E: javasvn description-line-too-long JavaSVN is a pure Java Subversion client
library. You would like to use JavaSVN when
E: javasvn description-line-too-long you need to access or modify Subversion
repository from your Java application, be it
E: javasvn description-line-too-long a standalone program, plugin or web
application. Being a pure Java program, JavaSVN
E: javasvn description-line-too-long doesn't need any additional configuration
or native binaries to work on any OS that
W: javasvn invalid-license TMate License
E: javasvn unknown-key GPG#72a0dcfd

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-11 19:06 EST -------
updated

http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...
http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...

I applied the debuginfo workaround explained on bug #191014

Checked rpmlint warnings:,
 invalid-license TMate License - http://tmate.org/svn/license.html
   What to to about it, it is a BSD license with an added clause about the
availiablity of the source code

wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding for HTML files is not fixed because it is not
needed

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-14 00:35 EST -------
We may have lost some useful comments here. It would be great if people could
re-post anything still relevant. Thanks.

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-14 16:33 EST -------
The only comment that was missing is:

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-11 19:06 EST
-------
updated

http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...
http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...

I applied the debuginfo workaround explained on bug #191014

Checked rpmlint warnings:,
 invalid-license TMate License - http://tmate.org/svn/license.html
   What to to about it, it is a BSD license with an added clause about the
availiablity of the source code

wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding for HTML files is not fixed because it is not
needed

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-25 23:22 EST -------
Updated:

http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...
http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...

* Sun Jun 25 2006 Robert Marcano  1.0.4-4
- created javadoc subpackage
- dependency changed from ganymed to ganymed-ssh2

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|[e-mail] |[e-mail]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-26 13:21 EST -------
Note that 1.0.6 is out, and I can no longer fetch 1.0.4 from upstream.

I looked at the license and it seems acceptable to me, but it also doesn't
correspond to anything rpnlint already knows about.  I suggest just leaving
things as-is and ignoring the rpmlint complaint.  I also suggest ignoring the
non-standard-group warning on the javadoc subpackage.

W: javasvn invalid-license TMate License
W: javasvn-debuginfo invalid-license TMate License
W: javasvn-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
W: javasvn-javadoc invalid-license TMate License

Other than that it does build fine in mock (with ganymed-ssh2 in a local repo)
and looks OK.  If you update to 1.0.6 I'll do a full review.

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-26 14:43 EST -------
Thanks... updated to 1.0.6

http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...
http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/...

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163778                      |163779
              nThis|                            |

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-26 15:42 EST -------
There's no reason to BuildReqires: coreutils; it's in the default buildroot.  It
would be pretty foolish to have a spec without cp and rm.

rpmlint says:
W: javasvn invalid-license TMate License
W: javasvn-debuginfo invalid-license TMate License
W: javasvn-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
W: javasvn-javadoc invalid-license TMate License
All of which are OK.

So no blockers.

Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  License text included in package.
* source files match upstream:
   fcb8db8a61cde8b5191ff6b1b87c5977  org.tmatesoft.svn_1.0.6.src.zip
* latest version is being packaged.
O BuildRequires are proper (redundant BR: coreutils)
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
O rpmlint has ignorable complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
  javasvn-1.0.6-1.fc6.x86_64.rpm
   javasvn-1.0.6.jar.so()(64bit)
   javasvn = 1.0.6-1.fc6
  =
   /usr/bin/rebuild-gcj-db
   ganymed-ssh2 >= 209
   java-gcj-compat >= 1.0.33
   libgcj.so.7()(64bit)
   libz.so.1()(64bit)
  javasvn-javadoc-1.0.6-1.fc6.x86_64.rpm
   javasvn-javadoc = 1.0.6-1.fc6
  =
   (nothing)
* shared libraries are present, internal to gcj; rebuild-gcj-db is called properly)
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* %check is not present; not test suite upstream.
* scriptlets present are OK (rebuild-gcj-db)
* code, not content.
* javadoc documentation split off to -javadoc subpackage.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.

APPROVED

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

Bug 191015 depends on bug 191014, which changed state.

Bug 191014 Summary: Review Request: ganymed-ssh2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191014

What    |Old Value                   |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|                            |NEXTRELEASE
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

[e-mail] changed:

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

[Bug 191015] Review Request: javasvn

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: javasvn

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=191015

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |medium
           Priority|normal                      |medium
            Product|Fedora Extras               |Fedora
            Version|devel                       |rawhide