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=466777 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-10-26 23:45:24 EDT --- Well, that took longer than I intended. Here are my comments: It takes about 30 minutes to check out the git tree. Is there any way to check out a subtree? The checkout instructions are slightly wrong; you need to cd into the "spacewalk" directory as well, and the instructions generate an srpm, not a tgz. We need instructions for generating the tgz. A "git archive" instruction would probably work. Honestly this would all be much simpler if someone just made a tarball and stuck it on an appropriate web site. I confirmed my comments above; "make srpm" will indeed make an srpm of whatever version of perl-Satcon happens to be in git head. The packager is supposed to bug the upstream developers if there's no copy of the license text included in the package. In this case, you're the upstream so I'll just ask you to please consider including the text of the license you use in your tarball. Really my only concern is the issue of duplicating the source tarball * source files match upstream (compared manually from git checkout). * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: perl(Satcon) perl-Satcon = 1.7-1.fc10 = /usr/bin/perl perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(Data::Dumper) perl(File::Copy) perl(File::Find) perl(File::Path) perl(File::Temp) perl(Getopt::Long) perl(RPM::Specfile) perl(Satcon) perl(bytes) perl(lib) perl(strict) * %check is present and the minimal test suite passes. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. -- 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