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: scala - Hybrid functional/object-oriented language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426867 ------- Additional Comments From geoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-04-28 08:39 EST ------- Okay, a new SRPM for scala 2.7.0. It no longer contains the reference documentation and tool support as those are being split into new source packages. http://programmer-monk.net/fedora/packages/scala/scala.spec http://programmer-monk.net/fedora/packages/scala/scala-2.7.0-1.fc8.src.rpm Regarding issues raised above (In reply to comment #25) > For 2.6.1-8: > > * Pre-rebuilt binaries > - To make it sure that all files to be installed are > built from free and legally compatible sources, > remove _all_ pre-rebuilt binaries first at %prep like I cannot do this because I need the bootstrap environment > * Legal issue > - Would you explain how the following files are used to > build scala rpm? > ----------------------------------------------------------- > src/library/scala/collection/immutable/Tree.scala in Source0 > ----------------------------------------------------------- I have changed the license tag to BSD and LGPLv2+, is that okay? I will also ask upstream about what the intent is there. > * Timestamps > - Please recheck that "-p" option is correctly used when using "cp" > or "install" commands to install files. For example, fixed > * man file > - Files under %_mandir are automatically marked as %doc. fixed > * License document > - For example, emacs-scala can be installed without scala itself. > In this case, no license text of scala is installed, which is > undesirable. > i.e. All subpackages which don't require ant either directly or > indirectly should also have license text as %doc. fixed -- 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