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: hunspell-ne - Nepali hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427513 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2008-01-07 00:52 EST ------- rpmlint complains: hunspell-ne.noarch: W: invalid-license LGPL A version is mandatory these days. I can't see one indicated anywhere in this package, though, and I'm not sure it's safe to just assume LGPLv2+. * source files match upstream: b19a287970de63d246b4710f15ff6a039527a394e88b17be1d0ffc90753ece72 ne_NP_dict.zip * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. ? license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none) * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly X rpmlint has a valid complaint * final provides and requires are sane: hunspell-ne = 20061217-1.fc9 = hunspell * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * acceptable content * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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