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: Fedora Directory Server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228555 ------- Additional Comments From dennis@xxxxxxxx 2007-02-14 10:58 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > * source files match upstream - no differences found when comparing included > tarball with tarball generated by included script > ! package meets naming and packaging guidelines. > Perhaps should use just GPL as the license tag? I was told that its fine as thats what it is > E: fedora-ds dir-or-file-in-tmp /var/tmp/fedora-ds > > Is this directory really needed? per instance run time files go inside that dir > W: fedora-ds log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/fedora-ds > > Is there something built into the directory server to rotate log files? FDS handles its own log rotation > I think that these can be ignored, rpmlint doesn't seem to handle this case > appropriately I agree > Other notes: > > * "-p" should be used to preserve timestamps when installing > slapi-plugin.h I agree > * Include a comment near the "Source0" line that indicates that the > "fedora-ds-cvs.sh" script should be used to generate the tarball. > > * Release should be 0.1.%{cvsdate}%{?dist} > Guidelines dont mention where the disttag should go in this case. I think its fine as is. -- 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