[Bug 655601] Review Request: jing-trang - Schema validation and conversion based on RELAX NG

[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=655601

--- Comment #8 from Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotni at redhat.com> 2010-11-30 04:27:14 EST ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> > 1. (optional) jing-trang-prepare-tarball.sh from srpm can be removed from srpm
> 
> All the packages I've worked with include it in the source rpm.  It doesn't
> cost anything to have it there, and the upside is that people can actually
> verify the contents of the srpm as well as roll updates just with the
> information in it without having to hunt missing bits from elsewhere.

Sure, no problem.

> > 2. simplify documentation installation by using %doc macro
> 
> I intentionally didn't do that initially because for some reason I remembered
> that the special %doc macro would do a "cp --parents" and would thus include
> unwanted subdirs below the doc dirs.  But that's incorrect, simplified in -5.

Good

> > 3. remove %clean section and rm -rf from %install section
> 
> These (and the Group tags) are intentionally left there because I want the
> package to be cleanly buildable as is for example on EL-5 (assuming
> dependencies are available). They don't cause any problems, and I can easily
> live with them around.

I though that might be the case. OK, no problem then.

> > I must say I am impressed with the patch and bugs you filed upstream to fix
> > the build system a bit. Great work.
> 
> Thanks, and thanks for the review which got quite a bit bigger than what you
> initially signed up for.  Next revision with the %doc stuff simplified:
> 
> http://scop.fedorapeople.org/packages/jing-trang.spec
> http://scop.fedorapeople.org/packages/jing-trang-20091111-5.fc14.src.rpm

Looking into this now.

> Some things I plan to look into whether they'd make sense and be feasible to
> implement in the future for this package, let me know if you'd like them or
> some of them done during the review, or have any opinions about them, in no
> particular order:
> 
> - Try to port the missing test suite generation bits to some other XSLT
>   processor than the old saxon, and if successful, run the whole test suite.

I think the whole building process for Fedora and other distributions would be
better off with no XSLT generation at all...but maybe I am wrong, since I just
had a glimpse at what you had to do to make this work. 

> - Install dtdinst's schemas and XSLs as non-%doc and register them
>   with the system XML catalog.

Yes this should happen too. You probably know how to do it, but just in
case...you can look at log4j spec file which installs log4j dtds

> - Review jing's %docs; isorelax.copying.txt and xerces.copying.txt
>   could/should maybe be dropped because they're not shipped in this package
>   (and copying.html maybe modified not to link to them) and maybe
>   datatype-sample.jar should be dropped as well.

Good idea, also asking upstream about it might help.

-- 
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.