Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: seedit: SELinux Policy Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222594 mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-01-30 07:11 EST ------- Well, * This package (seedit) is good. * md5sum of source coincides. * Your pre-review looks good to a certain content. - Note: My recognition is that setting the id of vendor as "fedora" is still recommended if upstream does not set vendor id. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines Okay!! ------------------------------------------------------------ This package (seedit) is APPROVED by me. ------------------------------------------------------------ Please go forward according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors I will sponsor you when you do a procedure and I receive a mail which tells that you need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review