Re: openjdk-6_6b08-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com>]

Thomas Viehmann schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm afraid that openjdk-6 still needs some work:

thanks for looking into this. after the second try to upload and 10 days in the
NEW queue the review is a bit terse.

> Up to now I found:
> - The debian/copyright file seems to miss a lot of
>   copyright notices (e.g. of Red Hat, Maxwell, ASF,
>   I stopped after finding four). This is the main
>   reject reason.

it would be helpful if you could mention those. it would be appreciated if you
could act proactively.

> - There are some files in the generated subdir that
>   I'm not sure I found the source of. Could you
>   clarify this a bit for me?

which files? Sorry, I really dislike rejecting a package for clarification
reasons. You can ask if you are unsure.

> - usr-share-doc-symlink-without-dependency
>   is an explicit policy violation and not allowed.

please be specific. or this lintian not detecting indirect dependencies?

> While you're doing stuff, you could also get rid of
> - substvar-source-version-is-deprecated

thanks for the hint, but this doesn't belong into a reject message.

  Matthias