Okay, if the ARC and cteam are happy with that then its okay with me Paul
Vivek Titarmare wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Pl. see my comments INLINE. > > Pl. suggest. > > Thanks, > ~Vivek R. Titarmare > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Cunningham [mailto:paul.cunningham at tadpole.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 3:15 PM > To: Vivek Titarmare > Cc: sfwnv-discuss at opensolaris.org; Enrique.Lopezpineda at Sun.COM; > Charles.Binford at Sun.COM > Subject: Re: [sfwnv-discuss] Request code review for "xom" > > Another quick skip through, comments below ... > > Paul > > PS. to sfwnv-discuss readers someone else also be looking at these !!! > Vivek Titarmare wrote: >> I have posted a webrev for package "xom" which I am porting to >> OpenSolaris and would like to request a code review. >> >> Please see below link >> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~vivekrt/6816367-xom/ > > === Start of Comments === > > 1. usr/src/lib/xom/METADATA > SRC: link, why did you not put the following link > here from the pkg's home-page ? .... > http://www.cafeconleche.org/XOM/xom-1.2.1-src.tar.gz > > and why are you using version 1.1 when there is 1.2.1 ? > > [VIVEK] For Drools dependency we had found this version as a requirement so > we are using the same. > > 2. usr/src/pkgdefs/SUNWxom/depend > Are the two 'zip' pkg dependencies correct ? > > [VIVEK] Yes, this was suggested by Enrique and is required for all the > packages. > > 3. usr/src/pkgdefs/SUNWxom/prototype_com > Should you be delivering all the 'tests' and 'samples' > stuff ? > > [VIVEK] No, only Drools test samples would be delivered. We had earlier > delivered only for antlr 2.7.7 which was required by imperius. However, if > the package contains the test samples they would remain in it and can be > used by the end user if required. > > === End of Comments ===== > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Cunningham Software Engineer Tadpole Business Unit
