https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305650 --- Comment #7 from jiri vanek <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Issues: - the usptream project is very poorely licensed. This should be fixed - the package license do not comply with upstream. I found usptream most close to CPL 1.0, but specfile contaiins CDL - the changelog is of course correct, but the version looks bad. How is your checkout related to 2.5-0.1... ?. You can expect next reelase to be 2.5 so yours 2.5-0.1 will not update to 2.5.0 (but of coourse it will to 2.5-1) THis is just something to thinga bout. Hard toi say what to preffere from: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages and - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages You seems to be in the middle - there are installed /suer/share/java uispec4j-jdk8 and uispec4j jars. They both seems to be nearly same by content, and both are built by jdk8. So I'm wondering if both have sense to pack and install. Non fatal issues: - Latest upstream version is on Nov 26, 2011 2.4. Thtas bad :) Maybe usptream can do just some 3.0.fedora "release" - tag only - so the ID used in spec and in RPM names is better? - # Fix non ASCII chars this shoould be upstreamed - It may be my lack if knowledge, but why the root package? It od not seem to have much sense... - I (for now - will retry) failed how to actually test if the package works. So maybe some helpo file can be packed with examples? -- 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