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=487312 Phil Knirsch <pknirsch@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(pknirsch@xxxxxxxx | |om) | --- Comment #4 from Phil Knirsch <pknirsch@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-26 12:43:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > MUST Items > ---------- > > [OK] Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. > [OK] The spec file name must match the base package. > [FAIL/INFO] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. > > FAIL: The description is not more than the summary. Please add some more > information maybe on how it is working or how it should be used. > INFO: There is a README and README.txt. What is the difference? > Extended the description of both the main and the utils package to contain more useful information about the packages. Also renamed the README.txt to DESIGN.txt as it is a rough draft of the design of the tuned. > > SHOULD Items > ------------ > > [OK] License file included. > [BAD] No translations for Non-English languages. Will come in a future version. > [BAD] Package functions as described: Not enough information for this. Extended the README and the tuned manpage, added a tuned.conf manpage and added a README.utils that describes in detail what the systemtap scripts do. Thanks a lot for the review so far! Regards, Phil New packages are now up: Spec URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned.spec SRPM URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned-0.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm -- 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