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=680020 Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> 2011-02-24 08:41:23 EST --- Hi Brendan, the package looks good now. Please also drop the BuildRoot field as it's not required in Fedora any longer. I also suggest to replace "jquery" with "jQuery" in the Summary and the %description because it's the spelling used by the upstream project. Both issues are no blockers, though. The next step is to request a Git repository with the distro branches you're planning to maintain. See the following wiki page for further information: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm python-pyquery.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jquery -> query, j query, equerry python-pyquery.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jquery -> query, j query, equerry python-pyquery.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lxml -> lx ml, lx-ml, lxvi python-pyquery.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) jquery -> query, j query, equerry python-pyquery.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jquery -> query, j query, equerry python-pyquery.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lxml -> lx ml, lx-ml, lxvi 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - BSD according to source file headers [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. - no license file present [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum pyquery-0.6.1.tar.gz* 2a677d7c52b1aa89f5aaa70427e36b70 pyquery-0.6.1.tar.gz 2a677d7c52b1aa89f5aaa70427e36b70 pyquery-0.6.1.tar.gz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), ... [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [+] MUST: Python eggs must be built from source. They cannot simply drop an egg from upstream into the proper directory. [+] MUST: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [+] MUST: If egg-info files are generated by the modules build scripts they must be included in the package. [.] MUST: When building a compat package, it must install using easy_install -m so it won't conflict with the main package. [.] MUST: When building multiple versions (for a compat package) one of the packages must contain a default version that is usable via "import MODULE" with no prior setup. [.] SHOULD: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [X] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. ---------------- Package 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