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: libical - A library for parsing iCal component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197765 michael@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |michael@xxxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From michael@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-07-21 01:39 EST ------- Hi.. I will review this package for you.. ---------------------------------------- Review for release 0.1.aurore: * Source libical-0.26-6.aurore.tar.bz2 is the same as upstream * This is the latest version * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint of libical-devel looks OK * rpmlint of libical looks OK * File list of libical-devel looks OK * File list of libical looks OK Needs work: * Package does not follow Fedora's package naming guildlines (wiki: PackageNamingGuidelines) I am not certain that the release tag is ok. So I will ask on fedora-packaging. * The package should contain the text of the license (wiki: Packaging/ReviewGuidelines) The tagball contains a COPYING file. You should add it to the %docs Notes: Looks good. Once I find out about the release tag and the COPYING is included, it should be all good. -- 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