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=785619 Michel Alexandre Salim <michel+fdr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel+fdr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2012-02-04 10:21:11 EST --- Only one tiny issue left, which you can fix when importing the package -- the -doc subpackage should depend on the main package just like -devel: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} (since after all it does not make sense to have documentation for a non-matching version of the package. Also, from experience, when -doc does not require the main package, you can end up with stray -doc subpackages after removing the rest) APPROVED. Let me know your Fedora account system (FAS) username and I'll do the sponsorship, and then request the SCM repo for lutok as described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests And do let me know when ATF is ready for packaging! * TODO Review [90%] - [X] Names [2/2] - [X] Package name - [X] Spec name - [X] Package version [2/2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning - [X] Version number http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Version_Tag - [X] Release tag http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Release_Tag http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages - [X] Meets [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines][guidelines]] - [X] Source files match upstream ✗ sha1sum lutok-0.1.tar.gz ../SOURCES/lutok-0.1.tar.gz 2d56bdd27eedcb7cea26fea3ad1bb258c248b9d0 lutok-0.1.tar.gz 2d56bdd27eedcb7cea26fea3ad1bb258c248b9d0 ../SOURCES/lutok-0.1.tar.gz - [X] [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries][No bundled libraries]] - [X] License [4/4] - [X] License is Fedora-approved - [X] No licensing conflict - [X] License field accurate - [X] License included iff packaged by upstream - [X] rpmlint [2/2] - [X] on src.rpm lutok.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://lutok.googlecode.com/files/lutok-0.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found harmless, rpmlint somehow cannot handle Google Code URLs - [X] on x86_64.rpm lutok-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Harmless, really. - [X] Language & locale [2/2] - [X] Spec in US English - [X] Spec legible - [X] Build [3/3] - [X] Koji results http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3762278 - [X] BRs complete - [X] Directory ownership - [-] Spec inspection [7/8] - [X] ldconfig for libraries - [X] No duplicate files - [X] File permissions - [X] Filenames must be UTF-8 - [X] no BuildRoot ([[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag][except if targeting RHEL5]]) - [X] Macro usage consistent - [-] Documentation [2/3] - [X] If large docs, separate -doc - [X] %doc files are non-essential - [ ] requires main package - [X] Development [4/4] - [X] Headers in -devel - [X] If versioned .so's, unversioned in -devel - [X] -devel, -static requires main - [X] No .la -- 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