[Bug 456280] Review Request: ini4j - Java API for handling files in Windows .ini format

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456280


Victor G. Vasilyev <victor.vasilyev at sun.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|needinfo?(victor.vasilyev at s |
                   |un.com)                     |




--- Comment #8 from Victor G. Vasilyev <victor.vasilyev at sun.com>  2008-08-29 14:32:20 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> X rpmlint:
> $ rpmlint /notnfs/langel/rpm/RPMS/noarch/ini4j-*
> ini4j.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/ini4j
> 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
> 
> Can you explain this?

It was explained in the comment #4 above (See the answer for "> You shouldn't
own /etc/maven/fragments or /usr/share/maven2/poms; ...").
Note, the spec meets with the example
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java#maven_2

> X 1.13 Summary and description
> Can you take out the line break from the description? Otherwise, ok.
- Description is formatted

> X 1.15 Documentation
> Is there a license file somewhere? I do not see one in the zip.
The software is protected by the Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004.
The text of the license is accessible on a project page -
http://www.ini4j.org/license.html 
The license is also referenced from the text of the legal notices that are
placed at the top of each source of the project. 
Note, such solution is completely meet with conditions of this license (See
"APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work." in the license text)

> X MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the 
> license(s)in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the 
> license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
> Is there one?
The original upstream of the project doesn't include a license file.
Therefore, this item - N/A

> X SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
> file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
> Please do this and add it to the docs.
- The http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt is added as a separate
source, i.e. under tag "Source1:" and it is installed via the %doc script.

Additionally it is also changed:
- Versionless symbolic link to the jar is added
- Redundant user-defined macro for the poms directory is removed

Spec URL: http://nbi.netbeans.org/files/documents/210/2046/ini4j.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nbi.netbeans.org/files/documents/210/2154/ini4j-0.3.2-4.fc10.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.