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=536684
--- Comment #2 from Mat Booth <fedora(a)matbooth.co.uk> 2009-11-22 09:11:23 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
* Package name and version are in accordance with packaging
guidelines
* SPEC file clean, legible and well-commented
* License tag correct, license packaged as %doc
* Local mockbuild with eclipse-mdt-uml2 dragged in succeeded
* RPMLint happy
* a couple of warnings spelling errors in fc13, all of them false positives
* warning about symlink target not being in package; ok since it's in
dependnecy
* Filelist okay
* Provides/Require list ok
Objections:
1.) Why do you check stuff out from CVS and make up a qualifier? There seem to
be a source bundle available at the downloads page:
http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/downloads/?project=ocl
See the eclipse-mdt-uml2 review. The qualifier comes from the release tag we
use to check the source out of version control - see get-mdt-ocl.sh.
2.) Please don't pretty-format the Description. It does not
always look well in
package management front-ends.
Ok, no probs.
3.) Please use build-classpath to get the file name of
lpgjavaruntime.jar.
Like:
ln -s ../../../../../../../$(build-classpath lpgjavaruntime) \
net.sourceforge.lpg.lpgjavaruntime_1.1.0.jar
Ok, sure.
Spec URL:
http://mbooth.fedorapeople.org/reviews/eclipse-mdt-ocl.spec
SRPM URL:
http://mbooth.fedorapeople.org/reviews/eclipse-mdt-ocl-1.3.0-2.fc12.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.