https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1081434 --- Comment #33 from Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> --- * Patrick has announced that he may sponsor your packager account, see comment 17, so it might be better to talk to him directly. * The fedora-review tool is happy about the package now, except for a few false positives and/or things the tool is not good at. * What puzzles me, however, is that since the beginning of this review, you've modified the source tarball for fixes instead of applying patch files from within the spec file: 467818 Mar 31 20:47 ip2location-c-6.0.3.tar.gz 764981 Apr 10 21:08 ip2location-c-6.0.3.tar.gz 3145564 Jul 8 04:32 ip2location-c-6.0.3.tar.gz This is very unusual and when it's the release habit of some upstream developers, it's a bad habit. :( * The source tarball contains a couple of documentation files (most noticably the README and the ChangeLog), which are not included in the RPM packages. * I have doubts about the -data subpackage. It's a "demo" database, yet the library strictly requires it. This complicates replacing it with another (more complete) database. The smarter packaging would _not_ have the library strictly require the -data subpkg, but require on a package capability, a "Provides" within the -data subpkg. That way there could be other packages that provide the same thing, and the user could use either one. -- 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