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=797330 --- Comment #4 from Cédric OLIVIER <cedric.olivier@xxxxxxx> 2012-03-12 16:24:22 EDT --- You can find here an informal review because I am not a sponsor : [+] mock build OK [+] source files match upstream 4f8fb83cfd03c0cc34967a73c6021531 [+] package name according to the Package Naming Guidelines [+] specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. [+] dist tag is present. [+] license field matches the actual license. [+] license is open source-compatible. GPLv2+ [+] license text included in package. [+] latest version is being packaged. [+] BuildRequires are proper. [+] compiler flags are appropriate. [NA] handle locales properly [+] package installs properly [+] debuginfo package looks complete. [1] rpmlint is silent. [+] no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. [+] owns the directories it creates. [+] doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. [+] no duplicates in %files. [+] file permissions are appropriate. [+] scriptlets are present and sane. [+] documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. [+] GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop [+] contain man pages for binaries/scripts (1) E: incorrect-fsf-address : non blocking, could you create a new bug for upstream. -- 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