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=519482 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |a.badger@xxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-27 15:05:52 EDT --- Good: * rpmlint: zikula-module-feeds.noarch: W: no-documentation There is no documentation in the upstream tarball so this is fine. * Package is named according to the naming Guidelines * spec file is named after the package. * License is good. (either GPL+ or GPLv2+) * Spec file is legible. * Sources match upstream -- but see below. Also note, since the zip file is created dynamically when a download is requested, md5sums do not match. This is due to timestamps differing, not differences in the code. * Builds in koji on EPEL-5 and rawhide. * not a shared library * not content * not relocatable * Package owns all directories it creates. * macros used consistently * Permissions set correctly * rm -rf %{buildroot} run at appropriate times. NEEDSWORK: * Change the license tag to GPL+ or GPLv2+ -- the code itself only references the GPL, so it would be GPL+. However, this depends on zikula so it might be GPLv2+ like zikula. * Since the source isn't retrievable by a direct URL, you need a Source0: line with the name of the zip file and then a comment that tells where to go to get the Source. When you do these two things, I'll approve this. Optional: * No license file in the zip file. Query upstream to see if they'll include one in their next release. -- 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