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=438609 Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #17 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-02 08:12:00 EDT --- == Review == - rpmlint checks return: elisa-plugins-bad.noarch: W: no-documentation elisa-plugins-bad.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elisa/plugins/database/widgets/resources.conf Not sure about that zero length file... make sure it is needed? If so, safe to ignore. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPLv3) OK, text not present in source, matches source (You may want to advise upstream that not including a copy of GPLv3 with the tarball is a probable license violation.) - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (796221b90981bd7ae3c09ca6535d2c82274742ec) - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime (because there is nothing in %doc) - no need for .desktop file APPROVED. -- 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