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: chm2pdf - A tool to convert CHM files to PDF files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456429 rakesh.pandit@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |rakesh.pandit@xxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |fedora-review? ------- Additional Comments From rakesh.pandit@xxxxxxxxx 2008-07-24 18:03 EST ------- Package has a small license field issue. Rest package is okay. Required: [x] rpmlint output: clean [x] package and spec naming [x] packaging guideline [x] license file included [!] license field should be GPLv2+ [x] spec file -- is legible and written in American English [x] md5sum Upstream: 2d5518e3284cca496270566c2554b713 Package Source: 2d5518e3284cca496270566c2554b713 [x] package builds on koji [x] package working on i686 [x] BuildRequires tag [NA] locales [NA] static libraries, shared libraries, header files [x] owns directory it creates [x] no duplicates files [x] file permissions [x] %clean and %install section have rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x] macros used consistently [x] package has permissible content [x] program runs independent of files in %doc [NA] GUI [x] All file encoding is utf-8 [x] no unnecessary bite compilation [x] egg-info file included [x] Optional: [x] LICENSE file included [x] description and summary not available in other languages [x] package builds in koji [x] package works as expected [NA] no sciriptlets [NA] no subpackages [x] no dependencies outside paths in FH Guidelines Optional Suggestions(you may consider not using them): a. you can remove python_sitearch definition as it is not being used Key NA = N/A, x = Check, ! = Problem, ? = Not evaluated -- 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