|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>|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-02-27 00:29:49 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
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
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 ***