Bug 252082 - Review Request: jarjar - Jar Jar Links
Summary: Review Request: jarjar - Jar Jar Links
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 532523
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review   
(Show other bugs)
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Colin Walters
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: http://tonicsystems.com/products/jarjar/
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2007-08-13 21:46 UTC by Vivek Lakshmanan
Modified: 2009-11-02 20:26 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-09-03 17:34:54 UTC
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description Vivek Lakshmanan 2007-08-13 21:46:58 UTC 
Spec URL: http://vivekl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jarjar.spec
SRPM URL: http://vivekl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jarjar-0.6-2jpp.1.fc8.src.rpm

Jar Jar Links is a utility that makes it easy to repackage Java
libraries and embed them into your own distribution. This is
useful for two reasons:
You can easily ship a single jar file with no external dependencies.
You can avoid problems where your library depends on a specific
version of a library, which may conflict with the dependencies of
another library.
Needed for supporting application servers
Comment 1 Colin Walters 2008-04-03 00:53:52 UTC 
Taking this.

+ Builds OK in mock
* I'd change the %description for the javadoc and manual to be a little bit
better; just "Javadoc for %{name}" and "Manual for %{name} is fine.
* Can we rm -f the shipped jar files instead of just moving them?
* Do we really need the %pre/%post for the javadoc?  I don't see that in the
current Java guidelines.
Comment 2 Rakesh Pandit 2008-09-03 16:42:15 UTC 
@Vivek & @Colin

Are you folks still interested in continuing this ticket?
This will be closed with in a week - if no update ?
Comment 3 Vivek Lakshmanan 2008-09-03 17:25:21 UTC 
I am not interested in maintaining this package anymore. Please consider this particular review request withdrawn.
Comment 4 Jason Tibbitts 2009-11-02 20:26:00 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 532523 ***
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.