Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865976 Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- boy I suck, sorry I forgot about this. Here we go... 1. -doc SHOULD drop Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} It's just documentation, really has no strict dependency on the base package. If you *do* really want a dep, since this is api docs, I'd recommend depending on %{name}-devel instead naming: ok macros: ok 2. SHOULD track library soname, I'd recommend using a few less * globs, and track files closer, using (something like) this instead: %files .... %{_libdir}/libsigrok.so.0* %files devel ... %{_includedir}/sigrok*.h %{_libdir}/libsigrok.so %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/libsigrok.pc because if any of these change, it means the pkg api/abi has changed too, and excessive globbing will hide that fact, and could lead to surprises later (broken dependencies in packages depending on this one). sources: ok 285c0b69aa3d36a431bf752c4f70c755 libsigrok-0.1.1.tar.gz licensing: ok A lot of the other details were verified already by Dan. As there are no blockers here I can see, APPROVED and SPONSORED. please do consider addressing the SHOULD items I mentioned prior to doing any official builds. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=vS2B2UI0bm&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review