Spec URL : http://cedric.olivier.free.fr/rpms/gettext-ant-tasks/gettext-ant-tasks.spec SRPM URL : http://cedric.olivier.free.fr/rpms/gettext-ant-tasks/gettext-ant-tasks-0.9.6-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: The Gettext Commons project provides Java classes for internationalization (i18n) through GNU gettext. The lightweight library combines the power of the unix-style gettext tools with the widely used Java ResourceBundles. This makes it possible to use the original text instead of arbitrary property keys, which is less cumbersome and makes programs easier to read.
Some quick comments: *In generate-tarball, please specify a specific version in the repository for checkout. I cannot verify the MD5 without this. *Generate tarball permission bits should be 744. (rpmlint output) *Using svn export is probably a better idea than using find to remove .svn after an svn co *If you like (not required, but I like it), you can add this to the top of generate-tarball to guard against misuse of generate-tarball: if [ $# -ne 2 ] ; then echo USAGE: ./generate-tarball NAME_VERSION RELEASE exit 1 fi *.java files do not appear to have LGPL licence headers, as required by the licence. Please raise upstream bug. *Any kind of licence files are missing. Please raise upstream bug. *Please post rpmlint output for reviews, as well as koji builds where possible *"Requires: jpackage-utils" for javadoc not needed, as javadoc requires main package which also requires jpackage-utils *Summary should replace the word "library" with "task". *Should this package not require gettext-commons (bug 515136) ? I assume that the ant-task will fail if it cannot find the gettext jar file. *Raise bug for upstream to provide tagged source releases in future. This will assist maintaining sync with project releases.
Quick additional comment. Ant tasks are required to register themselves in /etc/ant.d/%{name} , see Bug 167525 for more info
PING It's been almost a year with no progress; This review should be closed soon if there is no response, shouldn't it?
It's been more than a year without any progress on this review. Due to this lack of activity and no replies to the latest PING (Comment 3), this review is now considered stalled. I'm closing this bug just as described in Fedora's Policy for stalled package reviews: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews