Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460287 --- Comment #2 from Ismael Olea <ismael@xxxxxxxx> 2008-08-29 17:15:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > * License > - As far as I checked the codes, the license tag should > be "LGPLv2+". done > * The place of %description > - Similar to bug 460289, please fix the place of %description ups! > * %prep stage > ------------------------------------------------------ > %__unzip src.zip > ------------------------------------------------------ > - Move this to %prep (to make happy with --short-circuit) done > ? Symlinking > - Similar to bug 460289, would you explain why you want to > add version to jar files' names? I try to mimmic the same practice than binary libraries (*.so). Seens reasonable for me. > * Duplicate files > - "license.txt" for -javadoc subpackge is redundant. done http://olea.org/tmp/htmlparser.spec http://olea.org/paquetes-rpm/fedora-9/htmlparser-1.6-2olea.src.rpm http://olea.org/paquetes-rpm/fedora-9/htmlparser-1.6-2olea.noarch.rpm http://olea.org/paquetes-rpm/fedora-9/htmlparser-javadoc-1.6-2olea.noarch.rpm (I'm syncing them to the website, if find any trouble try later, please). -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review