https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988866
Adam Williamson <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #15 from Adam Williamson <[email protected]> --- [adamw@adam SRPMS]$ rpmlint php-pecl-event-1.9.1-1.remi.src.rpm php-pecl-event.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libevent -> lib event, lib-event, enlivenment php-pecl-event.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libevent -> lib event, lib-event, enlivenment php-pecl-event.src: E: unknown-key GPG#00f97f56 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. [adamw@adam x86_64]$ rpmlint php-pecl-event-* php-pecl-event.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libevent -> lib event, lib-event, enlivenment php-pecl-event.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libevent -> lib event, lib-event, enlivenment 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Those are all fine, the GPG key obviously won't happen in the Fedora build system. All MUST guidelines at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines are fine. SHOULD guidelines look good too. Review is APPROVED. Is it really correct to ship the tests as docs? Maybe a separate subpackage would be better? Just a thought, not blocking review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
