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=522727
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2009-09-11 11:33:47
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
X let's put a version requirement on maven2-common-poms
Fixed.
? should we add versions to other BRs/Rs?
No, it builds fine in
koji.
X need changelog entries
Fixed.
X need %post/%postun requires on jpackage-utils
Fixed.
X LICENSE.txt and all other licensing text conflicts; remove
LICENSE.txt and
report upstream?
- %files good
- sources match upstream
- naming good
- macros fine
- sources match
- builds fine
- rpmlint will be fine once changelog entries added:
$ rpmlint /home/overholt/rpmbuild/SRPMS/maven-plugin-exec-1.1-1.fc11.src.rpm
maven-plugin-exec.src: E: no-changelogname-tag
$ rpmlint
/home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/maven-plugin-exec-1.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm
maven-plugin-exec.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag
maven-plugin-exec.noarch: W: no-documentation
maven-plugin-exec.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/maven/fragments/maven-plugin-exec
$ rpmlint
/home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/maven-plugin-exec-javadoc-1.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
New sources:
Spec URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/maven-plugin-exec.spec
SRPM URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/maven-plugin-exec-1.1-1.fc11.src.rpm
--
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.