Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481594 Jochen Schmitt <jochen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |jochen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |jochen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt <jochen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-26 15:17:02 EDT --- Good: + Basename of the SPEC file patches with package name + Package name fits naming guidelines + Package is written in English + Could download upstream package via spectoll -g + Package contains the most current release of the software + Source tar ball in package matches with upstream (md5sum: ec6e1ddd678485c7971c8c0b5dd3cec6) + Package contains no patches + Package has proper BRs + Package will build as noarch + Package contains a valid license tag + GPLv3+ is a valid OSS license + consistently usage of rpm macros. + Package contains no subpackages + Small %doc stanza, so we need no separate doc subpackage + Local buidl works fine + Local install works fine + Try to run the samples scripts works fine + Locel uninstall works fine + Build on koni works fine + Rpmlint is silent on SRPM and binary rpm. + Buildroot will been cleaned on the beginning of %clean and %install + Package contains %clean stanza + Files have proper files permission + All files belong to the package + No files from the package is claimed by an other package. + Proper %changelog Bad: - Upstream package contains a verbatin package of the license text which was no put into the %doc stanza - I have found a test/test.py files, so it may be nice, if you can create a %check stanza in which this script may be execute as a testsuite. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review