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=499993 --- Comment #2 from Jochen Schmitt <jochen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-10 15:49:40 EDT --- Good: + Basename of the SPECE file matches with upstream + Package fullfit naming guidelines + URL tag show on proper project home page + Package contains most recent version of the application + Could download upstream tar ball with spectool -g + Tar ball in packages matches with upstream (md5sum: 15af44198d6a636190480122b8de7155) + Package contains valid license tag + License tag has LGPLV2+ and MIT as valid OSS Licenses + Package contains verbatin copy of the MIT license text + Consistently usage of rpm macros + Proper Buildroot definition + Buildroot will be cleaned on beginning of %clean and %install + Inclused patch is reliable + Local build works fine + Pacmage support SMP build + Rpmlint is quite for source rpm + Rpmlint is quite for binary rpm + Rpmlint is quite for Debuginfo rpm + Koji build works fine + Local install and uninstall works fine + Start of the application works fine. + Files has proper files perrmisions + %files stanza contains no duplicates + Package contains no files which belong to ohter packages + All packaged files are own by this package + %doc stanza is small, so no extra doc subpackage is needed + Package contains proper %Changelog Bad: - Wrong RPM Group. I think the aim of the application is not to emulate an other OS or system. - Sources contains no copyright notes. Please notify upstream to fix this issue. - Package only contains verbatin license text for the MIT license - Debuginfo package contains no sources - Package doesn't honor RPM_OPT_FLAGS -- 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