[Bug 518310] Review Request: plexus-classworlds - Plexus Classworlds Classloader Framework

[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=518310


Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |akurtako at redhat.com
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |akurtako at redhat.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




--- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako at redhat.com>  2009-08-20 10:58:14 EDT ---
Formal review:
OK: rpmlint gives only no-conffile-in-etc for the maven pom.
OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK: LICENSE.txt included as %doc. 
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. 
OK: Instructions for retrieving sources aded.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
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.
OK: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). 
OK: Each package must consistently use macros. 
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17]
OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. Javadoc subpackage. 
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly
if it is not present. 
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
PK: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT). 
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

The package is approved.

-- 
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.