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: gadmin-squid - graphical configuration tool for squid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457212 ------- Additional Comments From kevin@xxxxxxxxx 2008-08-01 15:31 EST ------- Sorry for the delay... OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. See below - License See below- License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: cdb23e367fc0d2f18c3717aabdc9ef21 gadmin-squid-0.1.0.tar.gz cdb23e367fc0d2f18c3717aabdc9ef21 gadmin-squid-0.1.0.tar.gz.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. Not sure the URL is right here. That site mentions that there is a new site called www.gadmintools.org, which appears to be a dyndns redirect. In any case, can you find a url that will point a user directly to the gadmin-squid page? 2. The license tag here seems to be 'GPLv3+' to me... ie, GPLv3 or later. 3. Might include the TODO and NEWS files as docs. 4. rpmlint says: gadmin-squid.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 14, tab: line 1) Can be ignored. 5. Why put the doc files in %{_docdir}/%{name}/ instead of just marking them %doc and getting them under the standard place: %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}/ ? -- 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