Thanks for the info. What's the best way to distinguish between dependencies needed for core and contrib?
I'm not really an ant/ivy developer, and just trying to help out with this package created by another Fedora maintainer. I'm much more familiar with maven builds. It does look like we're including some of the contrib stuff in this package. I'm not sure why. We probably shouldn't be, unless we put them in separate RPMs (subpackages). I'll look into separating them a bit in the future. As for license, it looks like BSD was included because of the hashtable bits which are compiled into the shared library? SLF4J isn't packaged in this, it's just a dependency, so its license is specified in its own RPM. -- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Flavio Junqueira <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Christopher, > > I had a look and couldn't see any major problem. You seem to be including > dependencies for both core and contrib. Just keep in mind that contrib > contains projects that aren't active and consequently might not build or run > properly. You may also want to MIT to the list of licenses. slf4j is under > that license. > > -Flavio > >> On 16 Nov 2015, at 16:43, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm trying to remove unneeded dependencies and classpath items from >> ZooKeeper, as packaged in Fedora. >> >> If I could get somebody to review the Requires and BuildRequires for >> anything obvious: >> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/zookeeper.git/tree/zookeeper.spec >> >> and the default zkEnv.sh CLASSPATH=... items for any obvious problems: >> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/zookeeper.git/tree/zkEnv.sh >> >> I would very much appreciate it. This would also help get ZooKeeper >> packaged for EPEL7, by reducing the work needed to package unnecessary >> dependencies there. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Christopher >
