https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1233240 --- Comment #6 from Till Hofmann <hofmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Spec URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/orocos-bfl.spec SRPM URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/orocos-bfl-0.8.99-2.20150905git927874e.fc22.src.rpm I've tried to fix all issues found by Sören: (In reply to Sören Möller from comment #1) > > I observed the following issues > MUST > [!]: In the deve-subpackage the headers are installed into a subfolder "bfl" > instead of "orocos-bfl" I do not think this is an issue as long there is no file conflict. I don't think the include directory must have the same name as the package. In contrast, changing the directory would possibly break existing code which expects the files to be in /usr/include/bfl. > [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. (see > details below) I've contacted upstream per email to clear up the license. I think it is supposed to be LGPLv2, and they simply forgot to change all references. > [!]: rpmlint complains about a lot of wrong FSF adresses (as noted in the > review request) This has been reported upstream, see above. > [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines (as result of the license > problem) see above > SHOULD > [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. (see details > below) fixed > [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise > justified. (see details below) Not relevant anymore, as all packages have been included upstream. > EXTRA > [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package > is arched. (see details below) Fixed by making the doc package noarch. -- 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