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=803082 Michael Scherer <m...@zarb.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |m...@zarb.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org |m...@zarb.org Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Michael Scherer <m...@zarb.org> 2012-03-19 08:53:05 EDT --- Hi, A few comments : - desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop If you use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, you should use it here too, ot use %{buildroot} in the beginning https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS - %%doc COPYING NEWS README Is this normal to have %% instead of % ? - the patch comment should have a link to upstream bug report, and explain more why it is needed. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment - I am not sure that mentioning en %description file formats not supported out of the box ( per licensing reason ) is a good idea. This is kinda misleading. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
