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=521067 --- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurt...@redhat.com> 2009-09-03 10:03:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > Only issue: line 40 is too long Fixed. > > - md5sums and sha1sums match > - licensing good > - naming fine > - rpmlint clean: > > $ rpmlint /home/overholt/rpmbuild/SRPMS/felix-osgi-core-1.2.0-1.fc11.src.rpm > /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/felix-osgi-core-1.2.0-1.fc11.noarch.rpm > /home/overholt/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/felix-osgi-core-javadoc-1.2.0-1.fc11.noarch.rpm > felix-osgi-core.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc > /etc/maven/fragments/felix-osgi-core > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > > For those playing along at home, Alex and I discussed the possibility of using > the Eclipse version of these OSGi classes. This would mean a tighter loop at > a > build level between Eclipse and Jetty. It also would mean porting work to > bring Felix up to the different (newer) versions of these OSGi classes in > Eclipse. At this time, it's probably easiest to have this separate, small > implementation. > > Also, it may be best to coordinate with the JPackage folks to split their > monolithic felix package like you've done so that there aren't file > conflicts. > At the moment, since Fedora doesn't explicitly support JPackage compatibility, > this is probably okay. Longer term, it'd be nice to interoperate. New sources: Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/felix-osgi-core.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/felix-osgi-core-1.2.0-2.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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
