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=484560 --- Comment #3 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti <promac@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-25 04:56:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > * Preferably bump "Release" prior to offering new src.rpm builds. That's > helpful when using rpmdev-diff. Here the 1.25-3.fc10 has been modified > silently. > Yes. You were faster than me. The new src.rpm is: http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/pydb-1.25-4.fc10.src.rpm > > * "Group" could be "Development/Debuggers" Done. > > > * "License: GPLv2+" and the source files mention GPL 2 or later, but file > "COPYING" is the GPL 3. Can you get upstream to clarify this? > > > * Instead of > > %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz > > prefer > > %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1* Done. > > since the manual pages get compressed automatically, and the compression method > and file extension may change. > > > * Why "BuildRequires: fontconfig"? I do not remember why. Maybe some issue with emacs. I'll go check. > > > * It's good packaging-practice to run a test-suite target, if available, and > provided that it is not known to be broken: > > Included. I also had already included all Jon Levell's observations. Thanks to both of you. -- 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