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=591298 --- Comment #11 from Mat Booth <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-05-14 05:14:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > >If no package in Fedora needs the legacy pom, is this still necessary? If > > "org.apache.commons" if the right way, I'd rather just do that. > > Is it possible to find out in some easy way? For my future reference :-) You > are right though, it's good to avoid polluting the spec file if it's possible. > When I did this in my specs I added a big comment stating why it's there...But > this really is not a show-stopper. Since we are doing this in rawhide, we will > have time to find out if something doesn't work. > Unfortunately I don't have an easy way to confirm this, but until very recently, this package provided no pom at all. I only added when I took over ownership of commons-codec, so I'd be surprised if there has been anything added to Fedora in the last few months that depends on it. > Thanks for explaining those OSGi bundles and your changes. > > Modified spec is good. This package is APPROVED Thanks (In reply to comment #10) > One small thing I realized: Please add Obsoletes (no Provides necessary) for > jakarta javadoc subpackage when you commit to CVS Will do, thanks. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review