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=595637 Thomas Spura <tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Blocks| |595638 AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura <tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-06-20 09:56:42 EDT --- I have a slow internet connection atm. Will do a full review, when I can download the qt stuff this week... A few comments for now: - Is there a reason why you use %{?isa}? I don't think leaving them out will cause problems, but maybe I'm wrong...? This makes only sense, when using e.g: %ifarch %ix86 Requires: %{name}.(i?86|athlon|geode) %endif %ifarch x86_64 amd64 ia32e Requires: %{name}.(x86_64|amd64|ia32e) %endif Or is this common in KDE? (This is my first look at a KDE/qt package ever^^) - You aren't consistend with tabbing: 4 Name: qoauth 5 Version: 1.0.1 6 Release: 0.1.%{gitdate}git%{githash}%{?dist} 7 Summary: Qt-based C++ library for OAuth authorization scheme 8 Group: System Environment/Libraries 9 License: LGPLv2+ 10 URL: http://github.com/ayoy/qoauth Would be more readable otherwise. - checksum does not match (which is excpected, because of the timestamps): diff -r is clean - name ok - koji successfull: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2259994 - rpmlint ok: $ rpmlint ./qoauth-1.0.1-0.1.20100525gitec7e4d5.fc13.src.rpm ./x86_64/qoauth-* qoauth.src:11: W: macro-in-comment %{version} qoauth.src:11: W: macro-in-comment %{name} qoauth.src:11: W: macro-in-comment %{version} qoauth.src:14: W: macro-in-comment %h qoauth.src:14: W: macro-in-comment %h qoauth.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install qoauth.src: W: no-buildroot-tag qoauth.src: W: invalid-url Source0: qoauth-ec7e4d5.tar.bz2 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. macro-in-comment could be avoided when using s/%/%%/g. - libs correctly packaged - no static libs - no *.la - parallel make is there - BR/R ok - doc is not too big, to need to split in a subpackage ############################################################################# Only cosmetic issues: macro-in-comment + tabbing + %{?isa}. ############################################################################# APPROVED -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review