https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287822 Troy Dawson <tdawson@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Troy Dawson <tdawson@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Note: I don't know why my rpmlist didn't understand ghost files, but I left those in. Need to Fix: - License file LICENSE is marked as %doc instead of %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text - The clients and tuned-profiles-origin-node package can be installed without the main package, which has the license. They to need a license when installed. - There are several directories not owned by any package. All of them are in the origin-sdn-ovs package, so I suggest it get fixed there. %{kube_plugin_path} %{_unitdir}/docker.service.d/ %{_unitdir}/origin-node.service.d/ Should Fix: - If this package isn't going to be for older distributions, it would be cleaner to remove the %defattr - I agree with Michael Scherer that the description is very short. (But I like the summary). If you go to the https://github.com/openshift/origin, and you remove the first sentence, the rest of the description there is pretty good. I suggest you add it for the description Debatable Fix: - I think the big question Michael Scherer posts is whether you should be totally true to the upstreams spec file. I believe the reason you want to be is because this spec file is also building packages in COPR, so it would be nice to not have to change it. -- If it is decided to deviate from upstream, then you should remove the three things Michael said. --- test for %if "%{dist}" == ".el7aos" --- obsolete of file not found in fedora/epel --- the comments that say the spec file was generated from upstream As well as the comment lines saying how bad this spec file is. -- 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