Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459540 --- Comment #7 from Ismael Olea <ismael@xxxxxxxx> 2008-08-24 13:46:01 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > MUST Items: > > - rpmlint warns aboun incoherent version in changelog. Easy to fix - just add > notes about latest changes under actual version (MW1.13-0.1.r37906). Strange: I'm rpmlinting my packages and get zero comments :-m I'm using this: [olea@lisergia SPECS]$ rpm -q rpmlint rpmlint-0.84-2.fc9.noarch [olea@lisergia SPECS]$ rpmlint -ivv mediawiki-imagemap.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. > SHOULD Items: > > - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate > file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. aha. > So, finally > > * please add entry to %changelog to make rpmlint happy done. > * consider shortening %description - no need to add notes, describing how to > download latest version (we should provide such support) Well, I'm confused here since you suggested to explain the way to get the sources (see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459540#c4). You mean to write it in comments inside the spec file or to remove it since the sources are created through an upstream service? > * find a minute to drop email to ustream about LICENSE inclusion done Thanks :-) -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review