https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821455 Jos de Kloe <josdekloe@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #14 from Jos de Kloe <josdekloe@xxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for pointing out the renaming issue, which obviously I overlooked in the above review, even though we discussed it before. Sorry about that. The most recent version in rawhide of the python-trml2pdf package is 1.2.9. (see https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/python-trml2pdf) As is detailed in https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/171#comment:5 this package will be renamed to python-trml2pdf12 without changing it's content, to allow a possible creation of a subpackage by the openERP maintainer. Therefore it should provide proper Obsoletes and Provides in the spec file. Looking at the lines: Provides: python-trml2pdf = %{version}-%{release} Obsoletes: python-trml2pdf <= 1.2-9 and reading the rules in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages this seems correct to me. Retesting the new srpm in mock the results seem just fine to me. Rerunning the fedora-review tool gives similar results to the review above. The rpmlint results do no longer complain about the spelling issue as expected: Checking: python-trml2pdf12-1.2-13.fc21.noarch.rpm python-trml2pdf12-1.2-13.fc21.src.rpm python-trml2pdf12.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/python-trml2pdf12/LICENSE.txt 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. This error was discussed as well above, and since there is no upstream for this old source code I will not ask you to patch this address. So looking at all this, I am happy with the result and this package is APPROVED. -- 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