[Bug 556780] Review Request: geronimo-jms - J2EE JMS v1.1 API

[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=556780

--- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako at redhat.com> 2010-02-10 08:34:54 EST ---
Review:
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. Warnings:
geronimo-jms.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided geronimo-specs-compat
geronimo-jms.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/geronimo-jms
Both are not a problem as we really want to obsolete and the second one is just
how maven works.
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 .
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK: 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.
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. Fetch instructions provided.
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} 
OK: Each package must consistently use macros. 
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. 
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. 
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} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT). 
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

Other comments:
* Please remove 
# drop the following asap
Provides: jms = 0:1.1
We should not get in smth that should be removed.

* Also remove 
# MEF added these herself -- don't know if they're truly necessary
Provides: %spec_name = %{version}-%{release}
Provides: geronimo-jms-1.1-api = %{version}-%{release}
If smth like this is needed we can add them later but I think that we shouldn't
have Provides unless we are absolutely sure we need them.

* %description is not descriptive
Smth like "The Java Message Service (JMS) API is a messaging standard that
allows application components based on the Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition
(J2EE) to create, send, receive, and read messages. It enables distributed
communication that is loosely coupled, reliable, and asynchronous. " is way
better. Shamelessly taken from http://java.sun.com/products/jms/index.jsp

* %description javadoc can be better e.g. "API documentation for %{name}."

Otherwise package is good.

-- 
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.