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: wxdfast - Multi-threaded download manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249524 ------- Additional Comments From dan@xxxxxxxx 2007-08-23 16:18 EST ------- the review is here: OK source files match upstream: 09f8a13c399e6e8f40e9b0a2776acd4133f0f1f6 wxdfast_0.6.0.tar.gz OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines. OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK dist tag is present. OK build root is correct. OK license field matches the actual license. OK license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. OK latest version is being packaged. OK BuildRequires are proper. OK compiler flags are appropriate. OK %clean is present. OK package builds in mock (Development/i386). OK debuginfo package looks complete. OK rpmlint is silent. OK final provides and requires look sane: OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. OK owns the directories it creates. OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. OK no duplicates in %files. OK file permissions are appropriate. OK no scriptlets present. OK code, not content. OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK no headers. OK no pkgconfig files. OK no libtool .la droppings. OK is a GUI app and correctly install its desktop file this package is APPROVED PS: are you aware of the many unresolved bugs in the project's sf.net bugtracker? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review