https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966201 --- Comment #4 from David Cantrell <dcantrell@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #3) > - As I already said, rm -rf %{buildroot} is not necessary for Fedora and > EPEL6. My mistake, I thought you only meant removing the %clean section. I've removed this remaining rm statement. > - Remember to update the changelog at every change. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs I will once it's incorporated as a package. During the review phase, I see no point because there are no releases yet. It's starting new and fresh and for those wanting to see the backstory of how it became to be a release 1 package, they can refer to this package review bug which is referenced in the first entry in the spec file changelog. > - You should include ChangeLog in %doc line. Done. > - I think you should add the ISC license together BSD > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/ > LicensingGuidelines#Mixed_Source_Licensing_Scenario > > Some source files are licensed as > > > $ licensecheck -r * | grep ISC > >libnetbsd/inet_pton.c: ISC > >libnetbsd/strlcpy.c: ISC > >libnetbsd/strlcat.c: ISC > >libnetbsd/inet_ntop.c: ISC So, like: "BSD and ISC" ? That's what I did. New copies uploaded: Spec URL: http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/tnftp.spec SRPM URL: http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/tnftp-20130505-1.el6.src.rpm Thanks! -- 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=chq7ySopJW&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review