[Bug 583643] Review Request: tigase-xmltools - Tigase XML Tools

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=583643

--- Comment #2 from Mary Ellen Foster <mefoster at gmail.com> 2010-04-19 08:12:43 EDT ---
Review:
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. Output:
==> tigase-xmltools.src: W: invalid-url Source0: tigase-xmltools-3.3.4.tar.bz2
tigase-xmltools-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs ->
Java docs, Java-docs, Javanese
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

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 .
??: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
==> How can you tell it's GPLV3+ rather than GPLV3?

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.
==> I checked out the sources and the checksum didn't match. However, that's
entirely due to language differences in the $Date$ fields in the source files;
i.e., all diffs were of the following form:
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
  *
  * $Rev: 444 $
  * Last modified by $Author: kobit $
- * $Date: 2009-07-22 19:15:19 +0200 (St, 22 čec 2009) $
+ * $Date: 2009-07-22 18:15:19 +0100 (Wed, 22 Jul 2009) $
  */

 package tigase.xml;

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
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates.
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.
OK: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
OK: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

A couple of questions:
- Why do you export LANG=en_IE.utf-8 before running ant? (Why in general, and
also why Ireland specifically?)
- Why not name the directory in the tarball tigase-xmltools-3.3.4 instead of
xmltools so you don't have to do the %setup -n part?
- What's up with the FIXME comment?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.