https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=836850

--- Comment #4 from Mikolaj Izdebski <[email protected]> ---
First of all I'd recommend you looking at the spec file of jetty. It is a
package with many submodules and structure similar to truezip.

Things that will need to be fixed:

1) JAR files must be installed into a subdirectory.
Quoting from the guidelines: "If the number of provided JAR files
exceeds two, you MUST place them into a sub-directory named %{name}."
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Installation_directory

2) POM files have incorrect names. It must be JPP.%{name}-${module}.pom
instead of JPP-%{name}-${module}.pom (note the dot after JPP part).
Quoting from the guidelines: "The name of the file should follow the
following convention: JPP[.<subdir name under %{_javadir}>]-jarname.pom,
where jarname is the name of the jar without the .jar suffix."
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Java/JPPMavenReadme#POM_file_names

3) %add_maven_depmap calls need -f flag. See jetty package for example.
See also: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#depmap_macro

4) Versioned dependencies should have version requirement in form of
"= %{version}-%{release}" instead of "= %{version}"

Some other suggestions:
5) You don't need to specify "Group: Development/Libraries" all the
time -- it's inherited from the previously defined package.

6) I'm not sure about inter-module dependencies, they look quite
inconsistent. I'm not saying they are wrong, but you can rethink them.
I added two dependency graphs I used. The first is the original one,
the second is transitively-reduced (but equivalent) one.
http://mizdebsk.fedorapeople.org/truezip.svg
http://mizdebsk.fedorapeople.org/truezip-red.svg

Once you fix the above problems (at least from 1 to 4) I can proceed
with the full review.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to