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: safekeep - simple, centralized configuration for rdiff-backup https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=241553 opensource@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |opensource@xxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From opensource@xxxxxxxxx 2007-08-29 06:50 EST ------- I cannot download the current spec file: $ curl -I http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/safekeep/1.0.1-2/safekeep.spec HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden [...] The srpm works. Here are some first observations: - GPL is not a valid value for the license tag anymore: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#head-f21ae23bf2f278444e2c385463cfa74a502396b8 - Source0 should be: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz not _pr_downloads... - the client subpackage seems to be empty, so imho you should rename the common package to client and let the server package depend on the client. Also it seems to be odd that the client package has a lot of Requires - Afaik there is no need to package "AUTHORS COPYING LICENSE" multiple times, packaging it in the client (common) package should be enough. - does this "Requires: safekeep-common = %{PACKAGE_VERSION}" really work? I cannot see where PACKAGE_VERSION is defined and the guidelines mention %{version}-%{release}" instead. - every %files section has to start with a %defattr(...) line, but only the %files section for common has one -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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