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: iDesk - Desktop icons and background for minimal WMs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=222998 fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-04-07 16:17 EST ------- Doing a complete re-review since it has been a while... OK - MUST: rpmlint is silent on all packages OK - MUST: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK - MUST: Spec file name matches base package %{name} OK - MUST: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines OK - MUST: The package is licensed BSD and meets the Licensing Guidelines. OK - MUST: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license OK - MUST: License from source is included in %doc. OK - MUST: Spec is written in American English. OK - MUST: Spec file is legible. OK - MUST: Sources matches upstream by md5 beb48c97815c7b085e3b3d601297fbb8 OK - MUST: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on x86_64 OK - MUST: no known exclude archs OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires OK - MUST: Package is not relocatable OK - MUST: Package owns all directories that it creates OK - MUST: No duplicates in %files listing OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly, valid %defattr OK - MUST: Valid %clean section present OK - MUST: Use of macros is consistent OK - MUST: Package contains code, no content. OK - MUST: No large documentation OK - MUST: docs don't affect the runtime of the app OK - MUST: No static libraries OK - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK - MUST: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT called at beginning of %install. OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm package are valid UTF-8. OK - SHOULD: builds in mock OK - SHOULD: package functions as described (even on x86_64 ;)) Suggestion: Renaming default_lnk.patch to %{name}-%{version-when-patch-was-introduced}-default_lnk.patch will make your life easier. ;) Final question: Why do you remove folder_home.xpm? Anyway, this package finally is APPROVED. -- 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