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=476829 --- Comment #4 from Dan Horák <dan@xxxxxxxx> 2008-12-19 05:23:32 EDT --- formal review is here, see the notes below: source files match upstream: BAD package meets naming and versioning guidelines. BAD specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK dist tag is present. BAD? license field matches the actual license. OK* license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. BAD latest version is being packaged. OK BuildRequires are proper. N/A compiler flags are appropriate. BAD %clean is present. OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64). N/A debuginfo package looks complete. OK rpmlint is silent. OK final provides and requires look sane. N/A %check is present and all tests pass. OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. OK owns the directories it creates. OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. OK no duplicates in %files. OK file permissions are appropriate. OK no scriptlets present. OK allowed content OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK no headers. OK no pkgconfig files. OK no libtool .la droppings. OK not a GUI app. - see comment #3 for more detailed description of the issues - versioning is wrong for a post-release snapshop - AFAICT unused variable are passed in the make calls - recheck the licenses for the files - include the license(s) as %doc - new snapshot is available - using only "rm -rf %{buildroot}" is sufficient for the %clean section - is the database useful for other purpose then for cups? -- 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