[Bug 597978] Review Request: maven-ant-plugin - Maven Ant Plugin

[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=597978

--- Comment #5 from huwang <huwang at redhat.com> 2010-06-01 23:38:55 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Review:
> 
> FIXIT: rpmlint must be run on every package. Output:
> 
> maven-ant-plugin.noarch: W: self-obsoletion maven2-plugin-ant <= 0:2.0.8
> obsoletes maven2-plugin-ant = 2.3-1.fc13
> 
> It is obsoleting with Epoch but providing without Epoch.
> To fix it:
> Provides: maven2-plugin-ant = %{version}-%{release} should become
> Provides: maven2-plugin-ant = 0:%{version}-%{release}

Fixed. As Stanislav said epoch should be 1(see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598058), for now I'm not sure about
it.
> 
> maven-ant-plugin.noarch: W: no-documentation
> maven-ant-plugin.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
> /etc/maven/fragments/maven-ant-plugin
> 
> 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 .
> 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. 
> 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, except for any that
> are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of
> those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
> OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
> OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a
> directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that
> directory. 
> 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. Executables should be set
> with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
> %defattr(...) line. 
> 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: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. 
> 
> Other than the provides everything else looks good.    

Spec URL:
http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/maven_ant_plugin/maven-ant-plugin.spec
SRPM URL:
http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/maven_ant_plugin/maven-ant-plugin-2.3-2.src.rpm

scratch built in koji:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2224086

-- 
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.