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=231861 Mads Kiilerich <mads@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mads@xxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #10 from Mads Kiilerich <mads@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-27 14:11:02 EDT --- Is this package still ready for review? (And shouldn't it be a Merge Review?) How can it be that it has status Assigned but isn't assigned to anybody? My first impression is that it looks like it haven't been dressed up for examn and could use some polishing before a final review. Some brief comments: It seems like most (all?) of the code now is licensed announcement-BSD-ish, so the License and the comments about it are a bit misleading. The spec is quite complex and verbose and IMHO not easy to read. The spec contains comments left over from the Invoca version. _perlhack variable seems to be unused since 7.3 - Red Hat, not Fedora! There are manu variables and configuration options. Are they necessary and used? The %file specs are very explicit and verbose. Is that intentional and necessary? (And %{_contribdir} is listed twice.) Rpmlint says 6 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 20 errors, 61 warnings. Some of the warnings might be invalid, but some of them definitely should be adressed before review. The spec has 30 sources and 15 patches without any indication if they have been pushed upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review