https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175771 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> --- REVIEW: [+] rpmlint is silent (or produces only messages which can be safely ignored: Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint ../RPMS/noarch/golang-github-jonboulle-clockwork-devel-0-0.1.git3f831b6.fc21.noarch.rpm ../SRPMS/golang-github-jonboulle-clockwork-0-0.1.git3f831b6.fc21.src.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: [+] The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [+] The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [+] The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines (Apache Software License 2.0). [+] The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [+] The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. [+] The spec file is written in American English. [+] The spec file for the package is legible. [+] The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum clockwork-3f831b6.tar.gz* 856c8f30fa3634616447eae03cef6d2f04be7f49f474bc4bb7298721c5ea1beb clockwork-3f831b6.tar.gz 856c8f30fa3634616447eae03cef6d2f04be7f49f474bc4bb7298721c5ea1beb clockwork-3f831b6.tar.gz.1 Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: [+] The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms. [+] All build dependencies aree listed in BuildRequires. [0] No need to handle locales. [0] The package does not contain any shared library files. [+] Packages does not bundle copies of system libraries. [+] The package isn't designed to be relocatable. [+] The package owns all directories that it creates. [+] The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. [+] Permissions on files are set properly. [+] The package consistently uses macros. [+] The package contains code, or permissible content. [0] No large documentation files. [+] Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. [0] No static libraries. [+] Development files stored in a -devel package. [+] The package does not contain any .la libtool archives. [0] Not a GUI application. [+] The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. I can't find any issues, 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