Bug 227121

Summary:	Review Request: wstx-2.9.3-1jpp - Woodstox Stax Implementation
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Rafael H. Schloming <rafaels>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	tross, viveklak
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2008-02-27 00:29:49 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Rafael H. Schloming 2007-02-02 18:00:21 UTC

Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/rafaels/specs/wstx-2.9.3-1jpp.spec
SRPM URL: ftp://jpackage.hmdc.harvard.edu/JPackage/1.7/generic/SRPMS.free/wstx-2.9.3-1jpp.src.rpm
Description: Woodstox is a high-performance validating namespace-aware
StAX-compliant (JSR-173) Open Source XML-processor written
in Java.
XML processor means that it handles both input (== parsing)
and output (== writing, serialization)), as well as
supporting tasks such as validation.

J2ME libraries for wstx.

Javadoc for wstx.

Documents for wstx.

Comment 1 Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-08-14 00:29:50 UTC

*** Bug 252110 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-08-14 00:30:33 UTC

(In reply to comment #1)
> *** Bug 252110 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

A newer version requested for review above

Comment 3 Hans de Goede 2007-09-23 18:54:03 UTC

I would like to review this as I need it for freecol which I'm packaging. Can
you please provide a new srpm based on the latest jpackage srpm for me to review?

Alternatively we could do things the other way I around, that I create the
package and you review.

Comment 4 Hans de Goede 2008-01-04 09:22:24 UTC

ping?

Comment 5 Hans de Goede 2008-02-26 21:00:09 UTC

ping?

Vivek, it looks like Rafael does not have the time for this package. I would
like to suggest that we reopen bug 252110 and close this one as a dup of 252110
instead of the otherway around, then I can review your newer package in bug 252110.

Comment 6 Vivek Lakshmanan 2008-02-27 00:29:49 UTC

I have reopened the bug. Note that if you are interested in this package I
highly encourage you to take over ownership. I cant commit to maintaining
packages for the next little while,. I am sure there is a way to transfer
ownership of the review/package to you and I would be happy to do the review (if
I am allowed to somehow be the reporter and the reviewer..)

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 252110 ***