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=500713 Jochen Schmitt <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|[email protected] |[email protected] Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Jochen Schmitt <[email protected]> 2009-05-25 12:04:43 EDT --- Good: + Basename of the SPEC file matches with package name + Package name fullfill naming guidelines + URL tag shows on proper project home page + Could download upstream sources via spectool -g + Packaged sources matches with upstream (md5sum: 5c14449d2960ddba89efc48269ba6f3b) + Package contains valid license tag + License tags state GPLv2 with exception as a valid OSS license + Consistently usage of rpm macros + Proper buildroot defintion + Buildroot will be cleaned on the beginning of %clean and %install + Package has several subpackges + Devel subpackage has proper Requires to main package + Package has proper Provides/Obsoletes statement for the renaming processs + Package has a SMP enabled build + Build honour RPM_OPT_FLAGS + Local build works fine + There are no complaints from rpmlint about the source rpm + Debuginfo rpm contains source files + Scratch build on koji works fine + Files has proper files permissions + All package files are owned by the package + %files stanza contains no duplicates + No packaged file belongs to another package + %doc stanza is small, so we need no extran doc subpackage + Package has proper %changelog Bad: - Package doesn't contains verbatin copy of the license. There is a text file which refer to the GPLv2 and a additional files which described the exception to use the packaged software together with non-GPLed software, but there is none verbatin copy of the GPLv2 - Rpmlint has warning for the binary package $ rpmlint 389-ds-base-1.2.1-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm 389-ds-base.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/dirsrv 389-ds-base.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name dirsrv - Rpmlint has warning for the devel subpackage: $ rpmlint 389-ds-base-devel-1.2.1-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm 389-ds-base-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib - Please use %{_sysconfdir}/rc.d/init.d instead of %{_inittddir} Your package is 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 [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
