[Bug 510255] Review Request: cobertura - a Java tool for calculating the test coverage

[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=510255





--- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin at tummy.com>  2009-08-08 15:27:09 EDT ---
Very nice spec. ;) I haven't done much in the way of java reviews, but this
seems to match all the guidelines pretty nicely. There is one license question
I ran into (see below). 

OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
See Below - License
See Below- License field in spec matches
See Below- License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
0b23286374edc1e0a9ed7dd592b0fed3  cobertura-1.9-src.tar.gz
0b23286374edc1e0a9ed7dd592b0fed3  cobertura-1.9-src.tar.gz.orig
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
      %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions)
OK - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane.

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
OK - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or
/usr/sbin

Issues:

1. Looking at the files here, it looks like the License should be:
ASL 1.1 and GPLv2+
The ant parts seem to be under the ASL1.1, and the rest is GPLv2 or later.
Unless there is something I am missing there...

-- 
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.