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=499409 --- Comment #3 from Guido Grazioli <guido.grazioli@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-09 07:46:01 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > - jar file must have same name as package: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java#Jar_file_naming > (drop the symlinking and just install %{name}.jar in %_javadir) > > - Same goes with javadocdir, don't version it. Ok for all other things, but why do you ask that? It seems that most java packages come versioned and symlinked (for javadoc as well). It is a jpackage guideline and there seems to be nothing opposing that in Fedora-java guidelines; look here: http://www.jpackage.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/src/jpackage-utils/doc/jpackage-1.5-policy.xhtml?revision=HEAD&root=jpackage#id2480655 Maybe because jargs 1.0 is mature since 2006 and there will hardly be a new release? Here are updated spec and srpm (with other fixes but without above, waiting for explanation): http://guidograzioli.fedorapeople.org/packages/jargs/jargs.spec http://guidograzioli.fedorapeople.org/packages/jargs/jargs-1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm As a side note, other packages originally coming from jpackage have Group: Development/Libraries/Java instead of Development/Libraries (ie the jakarta-commons-*.jar), but i used the last one to avoid an rpmlint warning. cheers (and thanks for your sponsorship!) -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review