https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=837726 --- Comment #5 from Gerard Ryan <gerard@xxxxxxx> --- Thanks for the review == Issues == 1. I've scanned the code and couldn't find any files under Mozilla's license. I suspect the License tag should look as follows: "EPL and LGPLv2+ and ASL 2.0". Please note the change of version of ASL. DONE. 2. Please include license files in the resulting RPM for following licenses: EPL, ASL 2.0 as per new guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text DONE 3. Decide if you want to use %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in your spec file and change DONE 4. No javadocs? No. Javadocs don't generally seem to be generated for eclipse packages. 5. Explain why are you skipping the tests when executing mvn-rpmbuild DONE (it's because of missing dependency swtbot) == Notes == 1. Update the information how to obtains the source code and create tarball. DONE. 2. jboss-as package is a required dependency? Apparently so, see http://www.fpaste.org/ojfk/ One of the jars seems to require several classes that are only provided by jboss-as. Also necessary for linking to jars that are bundled upstream: jboss-as-controller-client.jar and jboss-as-protocol.jar 3. Please use spaces in spec file, see rpmlint output. DONE. 4. Remove all *.jar files at the time of creating the tarball. This will decrease the size and we'll not ship binaries. DONE. Spec URL: http://galileo.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-jbosstools/3.3.1-2/eclipse-jbosstools.spec SRPM URL: http://galileo.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-jbosstools/3.3.1-2/eclipse-jbosstools-3.3.1-2.fc17.src.rpm -- 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