https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1163816 Michael Simacek <msimacek@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Michael Simacek <msimacek@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > NON blockin issues: > > [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. > > [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate > file > from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. > > Please, ask to upstream to include copy of LGPL license text. > Temporarily, install license file from https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.txt Including the license alongside the binary distribution is required by licenses such as ASL 2.0 or BSD. But LGPL doesn't have such requirement, so I believe this is not necessary. > > [!]: Latest version is packaged. (see above) I need the version to match version of sonar which is needed for gradle. > > Fix before import > APPROVED Thank you! (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4) > I have a doubt about this artifact > mvn(org.codehaus.sonar-plugins:sonar-runner:zip:) is it really necessary? It's not, removed it Spec URL: https://msimacek.fedorapeople.org/sonar-runner.spec SRPM URL: https://msimacek.fedorapeople.org/sonar-runner-2.0-2.fc20.src.rpm New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: sonar-runner Short Description: Default launcher to analyze a project with SonarQube Upstream URL: http://www.sonarqube.org Owners: msimacek mizdebsk msrb Branches: f21 InitialCC: java-sig -- 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