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=446841 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-19 17:35:14 EDT --- Actually you most certainly can remove the conditional for %fedora >= 8; you will need a different conditional for EPEL, since %fedora isn't even defined there. (Unless you're assuming for some reason that anything not Fedora behaves a certain way, in which case RHEL6 will definitely surprise you.) Of course, you also always have the option of just not using the same spec in EPEL. Since this is a prerelease, the Release: tag must be less than 1. Should be 0.3.20081202cvs%{?dist} The %description doesn't seem to talk about this package at all; it just talks about what a B2BUA does. If it had a sentence such as "This module provides a B2BUA (bullhorn to beef unstructured accountancy)" at the beginning, it would make more sense. Also, you probably want to use the correct definition for "B2BUA", as I have no idea what it is. * source files match upstream (manually verified) X package does not meet versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. X description needs a bit of work. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * 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: sippy = 0-3.20081202cvs.fc11 python-sippy = 0-3.20081202cvs.fc11 = /usr/bin/python python(abi) = 2.6 python-twisted-core * 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