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=460786 --- Comment #4 from Nigel Jones <dev@xxxxxxxxxx> 2008-09-27 02:49:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > + = good, x = bad > > x source files match upstream: > - I get different sums, see > http://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/mediawiki-Cite.txt > Let me know if you did it differently. Per IRC, tar/bzip produce different md5sums for each creation (on my system at least), the files do have the same md5sum > x specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. > - s/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{buildroot} > - Might be a good idea to change the svnrev to without an r and use it in the > comment that tells us how you created the tarball. It's created just like any other, as for $ vs %{} is really just cosmetic, something I can fix upon import. > x dist tag is present. > - Add %{?dist} to the end of the Release Not a must - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag#Do_I_Have_To_Use_the_Dist_Tag.3F > x license text included in package. > - Fetch a copy of the GPLv2 in text form and shove it in %doc. This is NOT a must/appropriate solution - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text -- 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