[Bug 630591] Review Request: mojo-parent - Codehaus MOJO parent project pom file

[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=630591

--- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako at redhat.com> 2010-09-06 12:27:56 EDT ---
Review:
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. Output:
mojo-parent.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Codehaus -> Codename,
Codewords, Code's
mojo-parent.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Codehaus ->
Codename, Codewords, Code's
False positive.
mojo-parent.noarch: W: no-documentation
No suitable documentation.
mojo-parent.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/mojo-parent
Not a problem.
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 .
FIXIT: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
FIXIT: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
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. 
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: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. 

So one big issue. We need license cleared.

-- 
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.