[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Mat Booth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Nathan Scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2017-09-01 04:11:52



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746



--- Comment #4 from Ralph Bean  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/uom-se

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746



--- Comment #3 from Ralph Bean  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/uom-se

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Lukas Berk  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|brol...@redhat.com  |lb...@redhat.com



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Lukas Berk  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Lukas Berk  ---
Package Review
==

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



= 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 30 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/lberk/src/fedora-
 scm/review/review-uom-se/licensecheck.txt
Reviewing these unknown files: There are a variety of internalization property
files, META-INF files and config files I wouldn't expect to include licenses. 
Multiple .java source code files which do contain proper licensing (which I'm
not sure why fedora-review didn't pick up as BSD-3), as well as the pom.xml and
readme which also contain mention of the proper license.  Passing this section.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: 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.
[x]: 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.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: 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 %license.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
 Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It
 is pulled in by maven-local
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
 subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)

Maven:
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even
 when building with ant
[x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and 

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746



--- Comment #1 from Lukas Berk  ---
Updated SPEC: https://bintray.com/pcp/f26/download_file?file_path=uom-se.spec
Updated SRPM:
https://bintray.com/pcp/f26/download_file?file_path=uom-se-1.0.4-3.fc26.src.rpm

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Dave Brolley  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|brol...@redhat.com
  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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Jonny Heggheim  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1434749




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434749
[Bug 1434749] Review Request: si-units -  International System of Units
(JSR 363)
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Nathan Scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG),
   ||1429804




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1429804
[Bug 1429804] Review Request: parfait - Java libraries for Performance
Co-Pilot (PCP)
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org