[Bug 212045] Review Request: eclipse-emf - Eclipse Modeling Framework

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: eclipse-emf - Eclipse Modeling Framework


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212045





------- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat.com  2006-10-25 14:32 EST -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> The fedora and redhat macros don't seem to be needed.  Can't you just define
> gcj_support to 0 or 1?  Similarly, the majmin macro is only used once, so it is
> not needed.

Fixed.

> The fetching instructions are fairly involved.  Does upstream not release
> tarballs?

No.

> How do you know that build_200609210005 corresponds to the 2.2.1
> sources?

EMF's download page links to their map file:

http://download.eclipse.org/tools/emf/downloads/drops/2.2.1/R200609210005/directory.txt

This shows what CVS tag corresponds to this release.  I'll note this in the
specfile.

> If fetching from CVS is the only option (as I've heard it is for some
> Eclipse projects) then why don't you include this fetching script as a source in
> the SRPM?

Yeah, all (I could be wrong but I'm almost positive it's all) eclipse.org
project don't release source tarballs ... at least not ones we can use.  The
Eclipse SDK is the notable exception here as they release their buildable source
drops, of course.

> Should the bootclasspath munging be done as a patch?

It's doing it in generated files so no.

> One other thing: I think license.html should be marked %doc.

Done.

> I'll post the MUST/SHOULD checklist as a separate comment.

Thanks.

Fixed stuff:

Spec URL: http://overholt.ca/eclipse/eclipse-emf.spec
SRPM URL: http://overholt.ca/eclipse/eclipse-emf-2.2.1-1.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.