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=635256 --- Comment #3 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> 2010-09-19 11:45:05 EDT --- OK, triggering wakeup again. :) Here are some more comments: - The Release increment is a bit too large. :) This field reflects the number of spec file revisions for a given version. So, just increase it by 1 every time you provide a new spec/srpm with identical version number. Also, add a %changelog entry for every revision. The release number of your next revision should be 3, and the %changlog should contain 3 entries listing the changes made for each release. If 2948 indicates your upstream revision or something similar, you might want to add it to the version number, e,g. 40.2948 or the like. - Drop the double BuildRoot tag commented out. - Add file LICENSE to the %files section (with %doc) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text - Add blank lines between the various sections (%prep, %install, etc.) to increase legibility - Remove the "echo" lines to avoid redundant output during the build. The %build section should contain a comment (starting with #) rather than an echo statement. - Drop "version" from the %changelog header http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs - If possible, please add a link to the tarball to the project website. Otherwise, it's a bit difficult to verify that the packaged archive is the original tarball belonging to the project. Maybe you could also add the version number to the filename, e.g. qtop-40.tar.gz or qtop-40.2948.tar.gz. -- 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