https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289604
--- Comment #3 from Mark McKinstry mmckinst@umich.edu --- Issues ======
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/maven- poms/bookkeeper(bookkeeper-java), /usr/share/java/bookkeeper (bookkeeper-java) [!]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even when building with ant [!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
AFAICT the tests aren't run in the build section?
NON blocking issues =================== - Package does not use a name that already exists. Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/bookkeeper See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Packag...
It looks like you're reviving the dead package so this is fine.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
commentary on what the patches are for would be nice. it appears its because Fedora has newer versions of guava and jline?
Following files don't have any copyright: bookkeeper-4.3.2/bookkeeper-server/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/proto/BookkeeperProtocol.java bookkeeper-4.3.2/hedwig-client-jms/src/main/java/org/apache/hedwig/jms/message/header/JmsHeader.java
Is it necessary to have all of the subpackages that just have one or two files in them?