https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259852 --- Comment #8 from gil cattaneo <puntogil@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Roman Mohr from comment #7) > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #5) > > NON blocking issues: > > > > [?]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. > > Removed some implicit dependencies from BuildRequires. > > Assertj can be used with junit or testng. I decided to add assertj as a > Requires. A developer can still just install the testng package and use it > with assertj. Are there better solutions for this scenario? Requires should be added/listed by our Java tools > > > > [!]: Latest version is packaged. > > Please, consider to upgrading to 2.2.0 or better 2.3.0 > > I presume you meen 3.1.0 instead of 2.3.0. > I updated to 2.2.0. Want to go with that, as 2.2.0 and 3.1.0 are equally yes, sure sorry for my mistake > well maintained and only 2.2.0 is java7 compatible. Maybe I should also add > a "assertj-core3" package? In fedora do not more exist Java7... > > %pom_xpath_inject "pom:project" " > > <properties> > > <project.build.sourceEncoding>UTF-8</project.build.sourceEncoding> > > <maven.compiler.source>1.7</maven.compiler.source> > > <maven.compiler.target>1.7</maven.compiler.target> > xmvn resisted to accept any other way to tell it that it should use java7 > mode. This should be done by our java/maven tools Please, fix : assertj-core.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.1.0-1 ['2.2.0-1.fc24', '2.2.0-1'] -- 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