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=522727 --- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-09-11 11:33:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > X let's put a version requirement on maven2-common-poms Fixed. > ? should we add versions to other BRs/Rs? No, it builds fine in koji. > X need changelog entries Fixed. > X need %post/%postun requires on jpackage-utils Fixed. > X LICENSE.txt and all other licensing text conflicts; remove LICENSE.txt and > report upstream? > > - %files good > - sources match upstream > - naming good > - macros fine > - sources match > - builds fine > - rpmlint will be fine once changelog entries added: > > $ rpmlint /home/overholt/rpmbuild/SRPMS/maven-plugin-exec-1.1-1.fc11.src.rpm > maven-plugin-exec.src: E: no-changelogname-tag > > $ rpmlint > /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/maven-plugin-exec-1.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm > maven-plugin-exec.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag > maven-plugin-exec.noarch: W: no-documentation > maven-plugin-exec.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc > /etc/maven/fragments/maven-plugin-exec > > $ rpmlint > /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/maven-plugin-exec-javadoc-1.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. New sources: Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/maven-plugin-exec.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/maven-plugin-exec-1.1-1.fc11.src.rpm -- 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