[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-31 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961

Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||akurt...@redhat.com
 Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-25 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961

gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||punto...@libero.it
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it
  Flags||fedora-review?



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-25 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961

gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- This seems like a Java package, please install fedora-review-plugin-java to
  get additional checks


= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[!]: 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 is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
 Unknown or generated. 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/gil/1079961-eclipse-m2e-mavendev/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
 supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
 are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
 in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
 from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: 

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-25 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961

Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-cvs?



--- Comment #4 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: eclipse-m2e-mavendev
Short Description: Maven Development Tools
Owners: mizdebsk mizdebsk msrb sochotni
Branches: f20
InitialCC: java-sig

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-25 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961

Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-25 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961



--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-25 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961

Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2014-03-25 09:14:46



--- Comment #6 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com ---
buildsys.build.state.change -- mizdebsk's
eclipse-m2e-mavendev-0.2.0.201311250404-1.fc21 completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=506831

Closing.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961

Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1079960




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079960
[Bug 1079960] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-sourcelookup - M2E Sources Lookup
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961



--- Comment #1 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com ---
I have submitted a request for upstream to include license text [1],
but for now we need to keep a separate copy of the license.

[1] https://github.com/ifedorenko/com.ifedorenko.m2e.mavendev/pull/2

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961
Bug 1079961 depends on bug 1079960, which changed state.

Bug 1079960 Summary: Review Request: eclipse-m2e-sourcelookup - M2E Sources 
Lookup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079960

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1079961] Review Request: eclipse-m2e-mavendev - Maven Development Tools

2014-03-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079961



--- Comment #2 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com ---
Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6668389

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review