https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279104 William Moreno <williamjmorenor@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |williamjmorenor@xxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from William Moreno <williamjmorenor@xxxxxxxxx> --- OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. OK: The License field in the package spec match the actual license. OK: The text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %license. OK: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] OK: Each package must consistently use macros. [16] OK: The package must contain code, or permissible content. [17] OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. Your package looks good, I will take your review request and become your sponsor but I want so see some informal reviews before aprobe the package and sponsor you as package maintainer. -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx