https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027380 Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (MIT) OK - License field in spec matches See below - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: b4437ce302bd6c3f4abda3d9330ddcf9 libxshmfence-1.0.tar.bz2 b4437ce302bd6c3f4abda3d9330ddcf9 libxshmfence-1.0.tar.bz2.orig OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun OK - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. See below - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. Might ask upstream to toss a copy of the MIT license in there if/when they do more releases. Nonblocker 2. This package owns /usr/include/X11, but there's no more sane package it could depend on to own that currently, so not a blocker. 3. rpmlint says: libxshmfence.x86_64: W: no-documentation libxshmfence-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Can be ignored. I don't see any blockers, so this package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review