https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902086 --- Comment #87 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #72) > - %description needs to be extended to say what this package does. The new text seems to have been pasted from a website. It's a promotional blurb. It even ends with "Learn more". > - Consider using %autosetup It would make the spec a bit simpler. > - Can the tests be enabled? If this package is as brittle as it is rumored > to be, tests would be beneficial. I'd like an answer here too. > I'd very much prefer to review the whole thing, including the .service file > if one is to be added. I gather that this will not be run as a service then, but only from the commandline? (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #86) > (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #82) > > After reformanting, this are differences between packed basae64 and included > > one. > > IMHO they should be upstreamed, but it is obviusly not ES way. Looking to > > them, I would rather kept them bundled. Those changes seem to be mostly cosmetic (encoding fallback, localization, and a check for illegal char). Your choices are a) unbundling, b) bundling with FESCo exception. I'd strongly advise against asking for a bundling exception, especially that in this case it simply does not seem worth it, and might cause this package to miss Alpha Freeze, and is likely to be denied. I'd suggest instead opening a bug against java-base64 to look at those changes and incorporate / upstream them if they look OK. ElasticSearch will almost certainly work fine without them, so the package can be approved without waiting for them. -- 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