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=530880
TK009 john.brown009@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(john.brown009@gma | |il.com) |
--- Comment #2 from TK009 john.brown009@gmail.com 2009-11-04 03:41:52 EDT --- 1. I used one of your spec files as a template, oops =). I have correct that and am now using the template from fontpackages-devel.
2. Those were choices made by the creator and I didn't feel comfortable changing them. I have corrected all of them.
3. The font name is not in either the Summary or the %description, only here in the Review Request. No action needed.
4a. Corrected missing metadata.
4b. I have advised the creator of the missing glyph's via email.
5. Awaiting clarification from the creator on this one.
6. I have advised the creator via email of this issue.
7. I ran repo-font-audit, rpmlint and fontlint correcting all but the warning about the license.
Will the license issue need to be corrected before this can pass review?
fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org