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=427483 --- Comment #16 from Ruediger Landmann <r.landmann@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-11-02 01:37:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) > The URL is not correct; at least, it only gets me to a list of fedorahosted > projects. Oops! Corrected. > Is there any point to the docuemntation-devel-JBoss stuff? As far as I can > tell, there was never a package with that name in Fedora. There were builds of that package used internally at Red Hat; they didn't make it into the wider world since this review stalled, but they certainly existed. The build linked by Jeff when he originally opened this review request was one of these. > As expected for a review ticket of this age, there are a few lines in the spec > which are not required for modern Fedora (BuildRoot:, first line of %install, > and for F13+, the entire %clean section). I would suggest removing them unless > you intend to target EPEL{4,5} (which I don't believe is possible, since > publican there is hopelessly ancient). Yeah, this won't work with Publican 0 (and the deps in EPEL are to old for any later Publican) -- however, Red Hat has builds of Publican 2 and its brand packages for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 for internal use, so I'd like to keep these items here to avoid having to maintain separate spec files. Thanks again! Rudi -- 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