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=501655 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-14 23:55:18 EDT --- Well, there's not much at all to this package; it builds fine and indeed rpmlint is silent. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: 5e28dc0c2ac3036adb05b42099c40e39aed70089aead49ea1bb4cc0d5230f8a1 spacewalk-proxy-docs-0.6.2.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * BuildRequires are proper (none needed). * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: rhns-proxy-docs = 5.3.0 spacewalk-proxy-docs = 0.6.2-1.fc12 = (none) * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * acceptable content. APPROVED The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package reviews recently, please consider doing one. -- 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