Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nekohtml-0.9.5-4jpp - HTML scanner and tag balancer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227090 klee@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |klee@xxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From klee@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-12 17:33 EST ------- Review comments: * Apache-like license is not proper license name. * license is not open source-compatible. - use acronyms for licences where common * correct buildroot - should be: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) * rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives some output W: nekohtml non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/HTML W: nekohtml invalid-license Apache-like E: nekohtml unknown-key GPG#c431416d * changelog should be in one of these formats: * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> - 0.6-4 - And fix the link syntax. * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> 0.6-4 - And fix the link syntax. * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> - 0.6-4 - And fix the link syntax. * Vendor tag should not be used * use macros appropriately and consistently - ie. %{buildroot} and %{optflags} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS * split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review