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=455426 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-10-09 02:07:59 EDT --- For 1.0-0.2 * SourceURL - SourceURL seems 404. By the way is 1.0 really released? * Requires/Obsoletes (In reply to comment #10) > but i don't know if i not add > requires for gstreamer-plugins-base < 0.10.19 the one can install > gstreamer-java which is not working in some case which is the reason for > requires in spec file.... - In this case I don't think we must ensure the full function of gstreamer-java should work. While it may be reasonable to add "Requires: gstreamer-plugins-base >= 0.10.19", IMO "Requires: gstreamer-plugins-good >= 0.10.7" is superfluous and this Requires (i.e. for gstreamer-plugins-good) should be changed to "Conflicts". By the way it is safe to add "Conflicts: gstreamer-plugins-ugly < 0.10.7" or so. * Group - of -javadoc subpackage should simply be "Documentation". * Pre-shipped binaries - Would you explain what many binary files under .hg directory are? Cannot this directory completely be deleted? -- 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