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=625939 --- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-08-26 09:39:59 EDT --- REVIEW: + OK - NA ? ISSUE + Package meets naming and packaging guidelines + Spec file matches base package name. + Spec has consistant macro usage. + Meets Packaging Guidelines. + License + License field in spec matches ? License file included in package + Spec in American English + Spec is legible. + Sources match upstream md5sum: [Ankur@070905042 rpmbuild]$ md5sum tintwizard-0.3.4.tar.gz SOURCES/tintwizard-0.3.4.tar.gz 1bc8dc416623510e813a28b88e04ff2b tintwizard-0.3.4.tar.gz 1bc8dc416623510e813a28b88e04ff2b SOURCES/tintwizard-0.3.4.tar.gz - Package needs ExcludeArch + BuildRequires correct - Spec handles locales/find_lang - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. + Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. + Package has a correct %clean section. + Package has correct buildroot %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) + Package is code or permissible content. - Doc subpackage needed/used. + Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig - .so files in -devel subpackage. - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} - .la files are removed. + Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file + Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. + Package has no duplicate files in %files. + Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. + Package owns all the directories it creates. + No rpmlint output. Some spelling suggestions.. Ignorable. SHOULD Items: + Should build in mock. + Should build on all supported archs + Should function as described. - Should have sane scriptlets. - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. + Should have dist tag + Should package latest version - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews) ISSUES: Please include a copy of the GPLv3 in the RPM. You can add it as another SOURCE. Apart from that the package looks okay. Will be approved once you've done that :) regards, Ankur -- 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