https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114749 --- Comment #3 from Gerard Ryan <gerard@xxxxxxx> --- Spec URL: http://ryan.lt/eclipse-webtools/3.6.0-2/eclipse-webtools.spec SRPM URL: http://ryan.lt/eclipse-webtools/3.6.0-2/eclipse-webtools-3.6.0-2.fc21.src.rpm Hi Gil, Thanks for the review! (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #2) > > Issues: > ======= > - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in > its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the > package is included in %doc. > Note: Cannot find license.html in rpm(s) > See: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > seem you use a eclipselink license file. please, report a bug for upstream > for include it I've changed this now to webtools.common/features/org.eclipse.jst.common_core.feature.patch/epl-v10.html which is included in the source package. Is this acceptable? > - Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build > Note: Jar files in source (see attachment) > See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Pre- > built_JAR_files_.2F_Other_bundled_software' I missed the class files, thanks for pointing it out. They're removed now. There's a false positive for the jar file that's reported, since it's a directory whose name ends with ".jar": > ./webtools.releng.aggregator/webtools.javaee.tests/tests/org.eclipse.jst.j2ee.core.tests/commonArchiveResources/loose_module_workspace/boo.jar Thanks, Gerard. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review