[Bug 223627] Review Request: system-switch-java - Java toolset switcher

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Jan 24 15:45:16 UTC 2007


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: system-switch-java - Java toolset switcher


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=223627





------- Additional Comments From fitzsim at redhat.com  2007-01-24 10:44 EST -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> I do not want to sound picky, but
> - the URL included in the spec is not very useful.

I'll change it to:

http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/extras/7/SRPMS/system-switch-java-%{version}-%{release}.src.rpm

once the '7' directory has been created.

> - The purpose of the md5sum check is to guarantee that the file included in the
> src.rpm coincides with the one from the upstream source. Computing the md5sum by
> the packager and by the reviewer based on the SAME file extracted from the same
> src.rpm guarantees nothing.

It guarantees that the reviewer is reviewing the same tarball that I think he's
reviewing (i.e., that I didn't build the wrong tarball into the to-be-reviewed
src.rpm).  But I agree that in the case of no-upstream packages like this, the
md5sum step of the review process is less meaningful.

> - each modification to the spec should be reflected in the release tag and in
> the changelog

Not for review packages that have not yet entered the revision control system.

> 
> In this special case, I suggest including a comment in the spec, specifying that
> there is no other upstream but the src.rpm

OK, will do.

> and, also, defining a real path for
> the said src.rpm (hosting it for instance on http://fitzsim.org or on
> people.redhat.com)

I'm not going to do that because I don't intend to keep the fitzsim.org src.rpm
up-to-date.


-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list