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=784950 --- Comment #11 from Matthias Runge <mrunge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2012-02-08 07:59:06 EST --- I read the list at [1] as follows: The reviewer is required to check each MUST item. You'll get bonus points, if you also check SHOULD items. MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.[4] did you check tat? I can't find that in your review MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] I can't find that in your review. MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] I can't find that in your review. MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. I can't find that in your review, that you checked that. Did you check macro-handling? Is this somewhere written down in your review? (list intentionally incomplete) [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Things_To_Check_On_Review -- 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