[Bug 606720] Review Request: maven-shade-plugin - This plugin provides the capability to package the artifact in an uber-jar

[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=606720

Victor G. Vasilyev <victor.vasilyev at sun.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |victor.vasilyev at sun.com
               Flag|                            |needinfo?(sochotni at redhat.c
                   |                            |om)

--- Comment #4 from Victor G. Vasilyev <victor.vasilyev at sun.com> 2010-07-07 09:25:15 EDT ---
Stanislav,

According to 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Reviewer
I've completed informal review:

1. All binaries files that are contained in the upstream sources should be
removed at the %prep section of the spec to be sure that they are not used to
build the target software.
Both the svn repo of the project, and, consequently, its archive
(maven-shade-plugin-1.3.3.tar.xz) contain JAR files, i.e binaries files.

2. The section %description javadoc:
NOW: 
This plugin provides the capability to package the artifact in an uber-jar.
SHOULD BE:
This package contains the API documentation for maven-shade-plugin.

You would use a pattern from the guidelines:
%description javadoc
This package contains the API documentation for %{name}.

3. Minor issue: Seems the macro style is used in the spec file. 
Hence, the following macros would also be used:
%__rm ...
%__cp ...
%__ln_s ...
%__mkdir_p ... # if any

This is minor issue, and its fixing is up to you.

4. The https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#maven_2 recommends to make
$MAVEN_REPO_LOCAL directory if it is declared and used in a spec file, i.e.

%__mkdir_p $MAVEN_REPO_LOCAL 

But, the spec doesn't do it.

5. Q: Should we declare and export the environment variable MAVEN_REPO_LOCAL at
all? Seems it is used locally in %build section of the spec file only. If so
then, probably, will be better to use a macros like this:

%global maven_repo_local %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/.m2/repository

6. Q: I tried to build this package on my Fedora box, but I've not found some
required packages in rawhide. What is wrong?

# yum --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rawhide install  maven-enforcer-plugin
maven-install-plugin maven-compiler-plugin maven-plugin-plugin 
maven-resources-plugin maven-surefire-provider-junit  maven-jar-plugin 
maven-javadoc-plugin  maven-shared-plugin-testing-harness
Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit
Setting up Install Process
No package maven-enforcer-plugin available.
No package maven-install-plugin available.
No package maven-compiler-plugin available.
No package maven-plugin-plugin available.
No package maven-resources-plugin available.
No package maven-jar-plugin available.
No package maven-javadoc-plugin available.
...

7. The https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#maven_2 recommends to
have:
BuildRequires:  jpackage-utils

8. Seems, if OpenJDK is used to build software, i.e.
BuildRequires: java-devel >= 1:1.6.0
then we always need explicitly specify version in the run-time requirement for
java to avoid problems with versions of both Java classes (i.e. 50.0) and Java
API installed on a system (i.e. 6.0):
Requires: java >= 1:1.6.0

9. Q: Why the version 0:2.0.8 is used in the tag:
Obsoletes: maven2-plugin-shade <= 0:2.0.8
?
I've found only a package
Name       : maven2-plugin-shade
Arch       : noarch
Version    : 1.2.2
Release    : 2.fc13

-- 
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.