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=768100 Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-12-15 17:23:31 EST --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (BSD) OK - License field in spec matches See below - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 8647f79046d53bc964961eb7687fa402 trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-20111215.git43a7537.tar.xz 8647f79046d53bc964961eb7687fa402 ../trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-20111215.git43a7537.tar.xz OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should function as described. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. It might be nice for upstream to include a copy of the license, and/or at least mention it in the files a bit more than a small note/mention in setup.py. Not a blocker I suppose, but might be good to ask upstream to add a note to the readme at least. :) 2. rpmlint says: trac-mastertickets-plugin.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US viewable -> view able, view-able, viable trac-mastertickets-plugin.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depgraph -> epigraph trac-mastertickets-plugin.noarch: W: no-documentation trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US graphviz -> graph viz, graph-viz, graphic trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US viewable -> view able, view-able, viable trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depgraph -> epigraph trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: invalid-url Source0: trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-20111215.git43a7537.tar.xz 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. All can be ignored. I see no blockers, so this package is APPROVED. Happy to help co-maintain if you like. -- 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