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=427483 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #15 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-11-01 20:49:32 EDT --- Oh, OK. It's generally best if you open your own bugs, especially since these ancient ones seem to be overlooked by everyone except me. Generally you should start your release with 1; releases less than 1 are reserved for prerelease packages. I'm assuming that you're just doing that for the purposes of the review; it's usually best to present the package as you would have it imported. The URL is not correct; at least, it only gets me to a list of fedorahosted projects. Is there any point to the docuemntation-devel-JBoss stuff? As far as I can tell, there was never a package with that name in Fedora. As expected for a review ticket of this age, there are a few lines in the spec which are not required for modern Fedora (BuildRoot:, first line of %install, and for F13+, the entire %clean section). I would suggest removing them unless you intend to target EPEL{4,5} (which I don't believe is possible, since publican there is hopelessly ancient). * source files match upstream. sha256sum: 47c12c97198dc62defb0f0c5f9bbe80171ec3736a467180e8d010d99d758241c publican-jboss-2.3.tgz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint is silent. ? final provides and requires: ? documentation-devel-JBoss = 2.3-0.fc15 publican-jboss = 2.3-0.fc15 = publican >= 2.0 * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. -- 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