[Bug 231263] Review Request: xml-commons-apis12 - JAXP 1.2, DOM 2, SAX 2.0.1, SAX2-ext 1.0 apis

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat Mar 10 12:46:15 UTC 2007


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: xml-commons-apis12 - JAXP 1.2, DOM 2, SAX 2.0.1, SAX2-ext 1.0 apis


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231263


green at redhat.com changed:

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




------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com  2007-03-10 07:46 EST -------
Here's the full review.  This package is APPROVED.  Thanks!

* package meets 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 (extracted from upstream svn so no md5sum available.)
* latest version is being packaged (well, the latest 1.2 version).
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock.

* rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/xml-commons-apis12-1.2.04-0jpp.1.i386.rpm 
W: xml-commons-apis12 invalid-license Apache Software License/W3C License/Public
Domain
We can ignore this.  Similarly for other xml-commons-api12 packages.

* final provides and requires are sane:
  dom = 2
  jaxp = 1.2
  sax = 2.0.1
  xml-commons-apis = 1.2
  xml-commons-apis12-1.2.04.jar.so
  xslt = 1.0
  xml-commons-apis12 = 0:1.2.04-0jpp.1
==
  java-gcj-compat
  jpackage-utils >= 0:1.6

* shared libraries are present, but no ldconfig required.
* 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
* scriptlets OK
* code, not content.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app (no .desktop file required).
* not a web app.



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.




More information about the package-review mailing list