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=501566 Brennan Ashton <bashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |bashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |bashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Brennan Ashton <bashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-23 21:44:53 EDT --- [pass] source files match upstream: 6bf9519eaebc3c353c9b234fee2c6761de4ceddb63f705f9d52bbf17816558a5 SOURCES/repoze.who-friendlyform-1.0b3.tar.gz [pass] package meets naming and versioning guidelines. [pass] specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. [pass] dist tag is present. [pass] build root is correct. (%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) is the recommended value, but not the only one) [pass] license field matches the actual license. [pass] license is open source-compatible. BSD [pass]latest version is being packaged. 1.0b3 [pass] BuildRequires are proper. [pass] compiler flags are appropriate. [pass] %clean is present. [pass] package installs properly. (it appears to, although I do not have a very good test case) [pass]rpmlint is silent. 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [pass] final provides and requires are sane: provides python-repoze-who-friendlyform = 1.0-0.1.b3.fc10 requires python(abi) = 2.5 python-repoze-who >= 1.0 python-zope-interface rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) <= 4.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 [?]%check is present and all tests pass: %check # Tests fail? # PYTHONPATH=$(pwd) nosetests what do these comments mean? do the tests fail, if so why? [pass]owns the directories it creates. [pass]doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. [pass]no duplicates in %files. [pass]file permissions are appropriate. [pass] code, not content. [pass] documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. [pass] %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. [pass not a GUI app]desktop files valid and installed properly. This gets my approval, if you do not see the %check section as a problem. This should be clarified in the comment as to what is going on. This was not built in mock as python-repoze-who has not made its way into the repos yet. -- 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