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=591545 Mat Booth <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Mat Booth <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-05-15 08:12:45 EDT --- I note that this is a re-review due to a package rename. When you say Chen is right, does that mean you intended to drop the use of epoch in your provides/obsoletes? Is there any point in specifying an epoch of zero? Apart from that, there is really nothing else wrong with the package. The rpmlint report only has false positives, the rest of the package is to the guidelines. You've clearly been taking notes from the other apache-commons-* reviews, I like easy reviews. :-) On the condition that you just clarify your position on the use of epoch as mentioned above, this package is: APPROVED! On a side note for future reference, did you know that your two calls to install on lines 71/72 and again on lines 83/84 can be combined into a single call? For example, these two lines: install -d -m 755 foo_dir install -p -m 644 bar_file foo_dir/bar_file Are equivalent to this one line: install -pD -T -m 644 bar_file foo_dir/bar_file -- 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