[Bug 816962] New: Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816962

Summary: Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: unspecified
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail],
                    [e-mail]
    Classification: Fedora
      Story Points: ---
              Type: ---
        Regression: ---
        Mount Type: ---
     Documentation: ---

Spec URL:
http://ladybug-studio.com/~neugens/downloads/fedora/fest/fest-assert/fest-as...
SRPM URL:
http://ladybug-studio.com/~neugens/downloads/fedora/fest/fest-assert/fest-as...
Description: Flexible or fluent assertions for testing

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

Mario Torre  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Depends on|                            |816264, 816926, 816927,
                   |                            |816957

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

Mario Torre  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |816967

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #1 from Mario Torre  2012-05-03 12:29:45 EDT ---
Those are built for f17 and onward:

http://neugens.fedorapeople.org/fest-assert/fest-assert.spec
http://neugens.fedorapeople.org/fest-assert/fest-assert-1.4-4.fc16.src.rpm

I had to skip the tests, due to the dependency over junit 4.8, while we only
have 4.10 which is incompatible.

Skipping tests doesn't preclude by itself the correctness of the package.

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

Omair Majid  changed:

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

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #2 from Omair Majid  2012-05-03 14:24:20 EDT ---
Package Review
==============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x]  Rpmlint output:

fest-assert.src: W: invalid-url Source0: fest-assert-1.4.tar.bz2

Okay, upstream does not publish source tarballs.

On the other hand, why are we not using the git tag upstream has marked as 1.4:
https://github.com/alexruiz/fest-assert-1.x/tags ? We can use that as a source
with url too so rpmlint can verify the source.

[!]  Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].

Upstream calls this "fest-assert-1.x". Any reason we are just calling it
fest-assert?

[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.
[x]  Buildroot definition is not 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:
[x]  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.
[!]  All independent sub-packages have license of their own

The javadoc subpackage is independent of the main package and does not have a
license file

[x]  Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[!]  Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package    :
MD5SUM upstream package:

Upstream's 1.4 'tag' is different (content-wise) from this 1.4.

[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)
[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
[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
[-]  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

There is an exact dependency on other fest-*, but since they are meant to be
used together, that's okay.

[x]  Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[!]  Latest version is packaged.

I am guess 2.x is not packaged because there is no fest-swing-2.x?

[x]  Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: fedora-rawhide-x86_64

=== Issues ===
1. We are using a changeset that's different from the changeset tagged '1.4' by
upstream
2. Package name is different from upstream: fest-assert-1.x
3. The license file is missing from the javadoc subpackage

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 
[6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Filenames

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #3 from Mario Torre  2012-05-03 16:12:27 EDT ---
Updated and change the name of the package (and spec file):

http://neugens.fedorapeople.org/fest-assert/fest-assert-1.x.spec
http://neugens.fedorapeople.org/fest-assert/fest-assert-1.x-1.4-5.fc16.src.r...

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #4 from Omair Majid  2012-05-03 16:34:38 EDT ---
I am having second thoughts about the name. Maybe upstream is using
"fest-assert-1.x" as a branch name rather than the package name. The maven pom
also calls it "fest-assert".

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #5 from Mario Torre  2012-05-03 17:09:50 EDT ---
Actually, upstream is a bit chaotic, so it doesn't really matter that much as
soon as the pom is correctly set.

I would keep it like this for now, in any case, fest-asset-1.x should be
replaced by fest-assert-2.x at some point, and we can make them live side by
side easily if this is needed.

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #6 from Omair Majid  2012-05-03 17:46:31 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I would keep it like this for now, in any case, fest-asset-1.x should be
> replaced by fest-assert-2.x at some point, and we can make them live side by
> side easily if this is needed.

The fedora convention would be, I believe, fest-assert2. Other packages doing
this include jline2, junit4, pygtk2.

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #7 from Mario Torre  2012-05-03 18:30:14 EDT ---
Ok then, renamed back to the original:

http://neugens.fedorapeople.org/fest-assert/fest-assert.spec
http://neugens.fedorapeople.org/fest-assert/fest-assert-1.4-6.fc16.src.rpm

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

Mario Torre  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

Omair Majid  changed:

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

--- Comment #8 from Omair Majid  2012-05-03 20:07:11 EDT ---
Sorry about the multiple names changes. The package looks good to me.

================
*** APPROVED ***
================

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

Mario Torre  changed:

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

--- Comment #9 from Mario Torre  2012-05-04 04:18:11 EDT ---
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: fest-assert
Short Description: FEST Fluent Assertions
Owners: neugens omajid rkennke jvanalte
Branches: f17
InitialCC: java-sig

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[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=816962

--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla  2012-05-04 08:24:59 EDT ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816962

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |MODIFIED

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816962

--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
fest-assert-1.4-6.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fest-assert-1.4-6.fc17

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816962

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|MODIFIED                    |ON_QA

--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
fest-assert-1.4-6.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816962

Michel Alexandre Salim  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |830278

[Bug 816962] Review Request: fest-assert - FEST Fluent Assertions

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816962

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ON_QA                       |CLOSED
         Resolution|---                         |ERRATA
        Last Closed|                            |2012-07-10 12:23:21

--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
fest-assert-1.4-6.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.