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=629660 --- Comment #3 from Terje RÃÂsten <terjeros@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-10-28 15:23:28 EDT --- MUST Items: + rpmlint output ok apache-poi.src:12: W: macro-in-comment %{version} apache-poi.src:12: W: macro-in-comment %{reldate} apache-poi.src: W: invalid-url Source1: http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Office Open XML 1st edition\ Part 4 (PDF).zip HTTP Error 404: Not Found apache-poi-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Javanese Only harmless things here. + named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines + spec file name matches base package name + complies with all the legal guidelines: + License: Apache 2.0 valid, matches actual license ? No known patent problems + No emulator, no firmware, no binary-only or prebuilt components + LICENSE packaged as %doc + source matches upstream: sha1sum: 28913957f7e98a37c1e42441c828f066659bfae9 poi-src-3.7-beta3-20100924.tar.gz 28913957f7e98a37c1e42441c828f066659bfae9 poi-src-3.7-beta3-20100924.tar.gz.pkg 1b3ddfa3ad13a9138f5399bdc4c10b54dd9df9d0 Office Open XML 1st edition Part 4 (PDF).zip 1b3ddfa3ad13a9138f5399bdc4c10b54dd9df9d0 Office Open XML 1st edition Part 4 (PDF).zip.pkg + builds on at least one arch (f15 Koji scratch build) + no known non-working arches, so no ExcludeArch needed + no missing BuildRequires (builds in mock) + no translations, so translation/locale guidelines don't apply + no shared libraries, so no ldconfig calls neeed + no duplicated system libraries + package not relocatable ! directory ownership correct - apache-poi-manual seems strange? No useful files included? + no duplicate files in %files + permissions correct, defattr used correctly + macros used where possible + no non-code content + no large documentation files, so no -doc package needed + no %doc files required at runtime + no devel symlinks which would need to be in a -devel subpackage + all filenames are valid UTF-8 + other packaging guidelines: + complies with the FHS + proper changelog, tags, BuildRoot, BuildRequires, Summary, Description ! no macros in Summary and Description + no non-UTF-8 characters + all relevant documentation included as %doc + no conflicts SHOULD Items: + license already included upstream + no translations for description and summary provided by upstream + scriptlets are sane + no file dependencies Java + jar naming ok + directory structure ok + buildrequires and requires + no pre-built JAR files ok + ant ok Summary: o could you comment on the patent situation, this being MS relates stuff. o manual package seems strange as is o macros used in descriptions, please avoid that. Unsure: I see the package don't include pom files, should they be included? -- 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