Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netpanzer - An Online Multiplayer Tactical Warfare Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190396 ------- Additional Comments From andreas@xxxxxxxxx 2006-05-01 21:32 EST ------- Blockers: netpanzer non-standard-group Games and Entertainment Please also include the COPYING file as %doc, as required by the packaging guidelines. Suggestions: I'd suggest changing the Requires: netpanzer-data to netpanzer-data = %{version} That way, you will not have to update the -data file, when you rebuild the executable, thus saving bandwidth. Right now, it is depending by default on netpanzer-data = %{version}-%{release}. The netpanzer.xpm file is probably unnecessary, especially as the .png file is referring to the .png file. Good: * proper naming * spec file name matches %{name} * package meets packaging guidelines X License is GPL, License meets packaged COPYING * Spec file written in American English * Spec file is understandable * Package succesfully builds in mock on devel x86_64 and FC-5 x86 * No locales/shared libraries to worry about * No static/libtool files * Package not relocatable * Package owns all directories it creates * No duplicate files * Proper file permissions, proper %defattr(...) in spec file * Package contains code * No need for separate doc package * %doc files not needed for runtime * No header/other devel package files to worry about * Desktop File included and conforming to the desktop file packaging standard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review