[Bug 469471] Review Request: skinlf - Java look and feel for swing

[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=469471





--- Comment #3 from D Haley <mycae at yahoo.com>  2008-11-23 09:47:22 EDT ---
Spec URL:
SRPM URL:

> #001: remove the copyright paragraph, else I won't review this package
Done.

>#002: avoid renaming spec files : %{name}-X.spec. Always keep the spec filenme
>as %{name}.spec. I have seen you did the same for all your packages.

I'm going to do it again, just to be difficult -- my local copy is always
blahblah.spec, only the bugzilla copies are blahblah-rev.spec. Sorry. How do I
make sure other people on the 'net can see the changes in the spec files after
I have made them? Is there a good way to do this?

>#003: rpmlint issues
>skinlf.i386: W: no-documentation
Fixed.

>skinlf.i386: E: description-line-too-long
Fixed.

>skinlf.i386: W: non-standard-group skinlf
Fixed.

>004: Build errors, possible missing BuildRequires:
>...
>warning: com.sun.org.apache.xpath.internal.
>XPathAPI is Sun proprietary API and may be removed in a future release  
Not technically errors, these warnings arise due to my usage of the sun xpath
api as a substitute for the org.apache.xpath api (patch #3), which was removed
as of sun JRE1.5 [1]. I can look at this again to see if I can make it work
without the patch, but that will have to wait. The package itself will still
work with the sun API, it just means that I may have to revisit and update
later. I'd rather continue with the current sun API if no-one knows how to
solve this properly, and doesn't object to doing so. Just so we can lift the
block on other bugs


>skinlf.i386: W: invalid-license Apache
Not fixed -- I am unsure how to proceed here. If you examine the LICENSE file
in the source, it isn't Apache, contrary to what's on their website [2]. Its a
redistributable with attribution licence, which doesn't appear up in the
rpmlint -iv output. Which licence should I select??


Current RPMlint output:
$ rpmlint -i skinlf-6.7-3.fc9.src.rpm 
skinlf.src: W: invalid-license Apache 2.0


Thanks for taking a look at the package!

[1]
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/xml/jaxp/JAXP-Compatibility_150.html#New
[2] https://skinlf.dev.java.net/

-- 
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.