https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825557 --- Comment #9 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Hi Greg, I'm not a sponsor so unfortunately I can't help you with that part. Your best chances to attract potential sponsors is by reviewing other packages so you can demonstrate your skills with RPM packaging and the Fedora Packaging Guidelines. Here are some open review requests for mingw packages which you might find interesting to help reviewing: mingw-xz: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830387 mingw-libarchive: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830388 mingw-gmp: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833622 mingw-nettle: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833623 mingw-lcms: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851180 mingw-lcms2: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851189 mingw-poppler: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851292 Once you've helped reviewing packages, feel free to mention the ticket(s) here so potential sponsors can follow your effort and decide to sponsor you >From my point of view, your latest .spec file is okay for introduction in Fedora. Just one minor thing that can be improved is that the BuildRequires: gawk isn't necessary as gawk is already part of a default buildroot. But as I'm no sponsor I can't give you a formal approval for this package. For that you really need a sponsor to step up... -- 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