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=798715 --- Comment #8 from Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-06 12:52:39 EST --- rpmlint: ok $ rpmlint luminance-hdr luminance-hdr.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US luminance-hdr.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary luminance-hdr 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Naming: not ok 1. since this is successor of qtpfsgui and replaces it, MUST follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages and contain (something like): Obsoletes: qtpfsgui < 2.2.0 Provides: qtpfsgui = %{version}-%{release} for upgrade path 2. Sources: MUST. md5sum does not match. in src.rpm: bd2d3782257cf502517e79852fff40be luminance-hdr-2.2.0.tar.bz2 fetched from sourceforge: 15caab0747cc5d5f1a3a496752b733d4 luminance-hdr-2.2.0.tar.bz2 3. scriptlets. MUST update icon scriptlets to match, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache 4. .desktop file. MUST not use --vendor=fedora, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage Licensing: Ok. got mostly GPLv2+, with some BSD, LGPLv2+. combined work is GPLv2+ Address items 1-4, and we're looking good. -- 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