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: rhino-1.6-0.r2.2jpp - JavaScript for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227113 dbhole@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|dbhole@xxxxxxxxxx |pcheung@xxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From dbhole@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-03-13 16:07 EST ------- > X license text included in package and marked with %doc > No license marked with %doc No license is present in the upstream tarball. st) > X specfile is legible > - the ant command in %build has reference to xmlbeans/xbean, should that be get > rid of? I kept it there on purpose so that we don't forget about it during next update.. I will remove it if you still want me to though. > > X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs > There are 2 errors: > E: rhino-javadoc zero-length /usr/share/javadoc/rhino-1.6/package-list > E: rhino-javadoc zero-length > /usr/share/javadoc/rhino-1.6/org/mozilla/javascript/ContextFactory.Listener.html > Are these auto-generated files? Yes, they are auto-generated and beyond packager control. Warnings about encoding are fixed. New spec and srpm: http://people.redhat.com/dbhole/fedora/rhino/rhino.spec http://people.redhat.com/dbhole/fedora/rhino/rhino-1.6-0.1.r5.1jpp.1.fc7.src.rpm -- 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