[Bug 225610] Merge Review: bcel

[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: Merge Review: bcel


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225610





------- Additional Comments From pcheung at redhat.com  2007-04-13 16:50 EST -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> * The examples/Mini README probably shouldn't be marked as a %doc as it makes
> more sense to just leave it in the Mini directory.
Done
> * The demo package probably shouldn't install things to
> %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version} but to %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/demo
Fixed
> * It seems strange that the demo package doesn't have any documentation
> describing what the classes do and how to build them. But I guess the sources
> don't have this information either
Yeah, the upstream sources don't have any documentation either.
> * The build file for the demo package is the build.xml for the whole project.
> Perhaps this should be included in the demo package (or maybe a subset that
> would only build the demos?)
I've made the main package a Requires: for the demo package
> * The manual subpackage just has the license file in there, there should be more
> to the manual than this. maybe the manual only gets built if using maven?
The docs/* stuff are built but doesn't get included in the package, I copied the
LICENCE.txt to %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}, so that the docs/* stays in the
package.


New spec file and srpm at the same location.

-- 
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.