[Bug 194566] Review Request: 915resolution

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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: 915resolution


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194566





------- Additional Comments From paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  2006-07-28 05:29 EST -------
Good
----

rpmlint is clean for the binary, debuginfo and src rpms
requires list is fine
permissions correctly set
builds cleanly in mock (x86)
README.fedora added to the package
tarball version matches upstream

Bad
---

It really does need to be enclosed in a wrapper with an example script for use
in %{_sysconfdir} - as it stands, it's one of those applications that you
install and wonder why you did - at least with something in %{_sysconfdir} users
will know what to do (or where to look!)

Minor
-----

release version is one off - this one should be 2 (there is no release 0!)
"public domain" as a license is fine for FE, but has caused issues in Germany.
This is not just FC, but lots of others. As it stands, FC is fine with it as a
license.

Fix the issue in BAD and I'm happy to approve it.

-- 
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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]