Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: peless - Text Browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239385 ------- Additional Comments From dev@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-05-07 23:04 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > I'll take a look later tonight. On second thoughts, you don't seem to be in FAS, so you'll need a sponsor (I'm not one), but here are a few notes: URL is meant to be the URL to upstream Source0: Should be a FQDN (i.e. http://www.foo.com/path/to/bar.tar.gz) Group: is incorrect, (check GROUPS in /usr/src/doc/rpm-%{ver} for valid groups) The BR doesn't seem to follow guidelines We don't use the Vendor tag anymore Ditto for Distribution and Prefix Summary is too simplistic _prefix, _sharedir etc are already defined as RPM macros. PLEASE read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join fully up to about Build System tools. If you want an example of a spec file that recently passed review check out: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/windowlab.spec http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/ocaml-SDL.spec or have a look around the fedora CVS where there are plenty of well maintained SPEC files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review