Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: objectweb-asm - Version 3.0 of the ObjectWeb ASM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=254008 bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |rawhide ------- Additional Comments From fnasser@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-11-30 18:38 EST ------- [1] LICENSE.txt must be included as a documentation file. Nice catch, I wonder why their dist target does not copy it over. Anyway, I am adding it as %doc in the next spin. [2] README.txt and LICENSE.txt both must have their end-of-line encodings fixed. I inspected both files and they don't have any EOL problems. Seem to be fine ix terminated lines. Why do you think there is a problem? [3] The package xml-commons-apis (or maybe just jaxp) is both a BuildRequires and a Requires, due to its use in the org.objectweb.asm.xml package. I am 100% sure it builds without it, so it is not a build requires. I did not see any target doing conditional compilation of classes based on its presence either. In any case, 'ant' itself brings jaxp, so it could be assumed (I removed with nodeps for testing). I checked the ASM web site http://asm.objectweb.org/ and could not find any reference about the need of xml-commons for anything. Yet you say it should be a run-time dependency. Is it something optional? But if it is, unless it is used by reflection, we should have needed it at build time too. An optional dependency perhaps? We don't add Requires for those. I will wait for your comments on the above before uploading the one with [1] fixed as I may be missing something. Thanks again for the reviewing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review