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=463211 Michel Alexandre Salim <michel.sylvan@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #18 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel.sylvan@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-10-10 10:59:27 EDT --- ReviewTemplate MUST • rpmlint: OK -- errors are irrelevant • package name: OK • spec file name: OK • package guideline-compliant: OK • license complies with guidelines: OK • license field accurate: OK • license file not deleted: OK • spec in US English: OK • spec legible: OK • source matches upstream: OK • builds under >= 1 archs, others excluded: OK. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=873117 *** NOTE *** Might want to add a comment on top of the %ExclusiveArch line. Since the mono stack is incomplete on many platforms, no need to create a bug report for this • build dependencies complete: OK • own all directories: OK • no dupes in %files: OK • permission: OK • %clean RPM_BUILD_ROOT: OK • macros used consistently: OK • Package contains code: OK • large docs => -doc: OK • doc not runtime dependent: OK • headers in -devel: OK • if contains *.pc, req pkgconfig: OK • devel requires versioned base package: OK • clean buildroot before install: OK • filenames UTF-8: OK SHOULD • package build in mock on all architectures: OK (as far as Mono stack allows) • package functioned as described: OK • scriplets are sane: OK • other subpackages should require versioned base: OK • require package not files: OK APPROVED -- 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