https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1202470 --- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo <puntogil@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antti Järvinen from comment #4) > Hello Gil, > > I don't have permission to submit your package further but I made a review > anyway. For most part this looks good but I have a few items and questions > and one part I did not understand: > > - there are files with multiple licenses, this is documented in comments > of the spec file but I'm not sure if it is correct to document this > in comments ; on the other hand I don't know the correct way in this case. > The actual License: part in spec looks ok to me, according to > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing. > - In section "Maven" there is a requirement stating > > [?]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even > when building with ant already done, see Provides > and now I wasn't sure if this is about building the package itself > (no maven nor ant is used in process, it seems) or about usage of the > installed pom file (there seems to be a pom-file). I did not try using the > pom file with ant so this is a question mark to me. which pom? are all installed and an depmap is provided contact mizdebsk in fedora-java irc channel, him can explain better then me > - %check section is missing, comments in spec indicate that this is on > purpose. with maven is different, the tests are performed during the construction phase if there are all requested dependencies > - Source0: points to github but there seems to be nothing in given URL? i don't understand, if you run wget can download the source tarball ... -- 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