https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1054941 --- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> --- A brief look only: > Name: esteidfirefoxplugin The modern package Naming Guidelines suggest adding a firefox- prefix, since this is a plugin that extends Firefox. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Naming -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28General.29 > Summary: EstEID browser plugin for digital signing Is the plugin specific to Firefox? Or is only stored in Firefox's plugin path but based on the old Netscape Plugin API and then would be compatible with any browser that supports the NPAPI? If the summary mentioned Firefox it would be more clear, e.g. Summary: Firefox plugin for signing with Estonian ID cards > License: LGPLv2 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#.22or_later_version.22_licenses > Requires: opensc > Requires: pcsc-lite > Requires: esteidpkcs11loader It's good practise to add comments to explicit Requires and explain what exactly is needed. A dependency on a package name could be broken easily, if a file moves into a different (sub-)package, for example. > %description > EstEID Firefox plugin That's way too short and too lazy for a package description. > make plugin %{?_smp_mflags} https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags Some packagers like doing something similar to %configure || : make … to have the %configure macro export Fedora's CFLAGS and LDFLAGS, if the used Makefile picks them up. > %install > rm -rf %{buildroot} If you want to target EL5, too, better be explicit about that during package review because of: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag > %defattr(-,root,root,-) Not necessary anymore for any of the active dist releases including EL5. > %doc README.txt https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > %{_libdir}/mozilla/plugins/npesteid-firefox-plugin.so Please review the File and Directory Ownership section in the guidelines, since without a dependency on firefox, there would be "unowned" directories. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership -- 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