Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sinjdoc - Documentation generator for Java source code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231732 ------- Additional Comments From fitzsim@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-03-13 00:19 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > My only comment: should we Obsolete/Provide gjdoc? No, the two tools can be installed in parallel, and sinjdoc doesn't yet support all of the command-line options that gjdoc supports. I think for the first few sinjdoc package releases we should keep gjdoc around, and obsolete gjdoc later. > > The only thing that needs fixing is the changelog entry. OK, I always use the Emacs rpm-mode changelog format. I guess it pads dates with spaces rather than numbers. Anyway, it looks like I'll commit this package on a double-digit date, so the padding is irrelevant. The updated spec and SRPM files are at the same URLs. I think this one is ready-to-go. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review