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=786213 --- Comment #5 from Karel Klíč <kklic@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-28 11:17:18 EDT --- Kevin, thank you for the review! Here is an updated version: Spec URL: http://kklic.fedorapeople.org/trac-agilo-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://kklic.fedorapeople.org/trac-agilo-plugin-0.9.7-2.fc16.src.rpm * Wed Mar 28 2012 Karel Klíč <kklic@xxxxxxxxxx> - 0.9.7-2 - Commented macros changed to %% (In reply to comment #4) > Issues: > > 1. You might ask upstream to include a copy of the license. > Not a blocker though. > > 2. You don't need a builtroot or clean section for Fedora anymore, but > you do for EPEL6, so you might add those back for that. It seems that the BuildRoot tag and the clean section are not required in EPEL6: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Distribution_specific_guidelines > > 3. You need a > rm -rf %{buildroot} > at the top of the install section. This is required only for EPEL5 and older: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Prepping_BuildRoot_For_.25install > > 4. rpmlint says: > > Can be ignored, but man pages would be nice: > > trac-agilo-plugin.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary agilo_sqlite2pg > trac-agilo-plugin.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary create_agilo_project > trac-agilo-plugin.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary agilo_svn_hook_commit > > You should change all the commented macros to %% > > trac-agilo-plugin.src:30: W: macro-in-comment %check > trac-agilo-plugin.src:31: W: macro-in-comment %{python_sitelib} > trac-agilo-plugin.src:32: W: macro-in-comment %{python_sitelib} > trac-agilo-plugin.src:33: W: macro-in-comment %{_defaultdocdir} > trac-agilo-plugin.src:33: W: macro-in-comment %{VERSION} > trac-agilo-plugin.src:34: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} > trac-agilo-plugin.src:34: W: macro-in-comment %{python_sitelib} > trac-agilo-plugin.src:34: W: macro-in-comment %{__python} Done. > > Can be ignored: > > trac-agilo-plugin.src: W: invalid-url Source0: agilo_source.tar.gz > > 5. Is there a specific version of trac thats required? Yes, the upstream package requires trac >= 0.11. This condition is satisfied in all Fedora branches and EPEL6 branch. Do we have a policy or convention to add the versioned require to the spec file? I propose adding the version when the non-versioned require one will cause problems somewhere. -- 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