Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: tex-simplecv - latex class for writing curricula vitae
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428686
tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |tibbs@math.uh.edu Flag| |fedora-review+
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-06-26 20:00 EST ------- Sorry for closing, but sometimes when there's no response to pings and NEEDINFO, closing the ticket does the trick.
I note you're not using the dist tag; you package enough things in Fedora that I assume you can deal with the issues, but lately even experienced packagers have run into issues caused by not using the dist tag so I would still recommend it. But in the end it's your choice.
* source files match upstream: a011ab46e968e4dfabfa8b56a892b0ae05aaeb481c8c8d21dc0d82e2c213bacb simplecv.zip * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * 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: tex-simplecv-1.6-5.noarch.rpm tex-simplecv = 1.6-5 = /usr/bin/texhash tetex-latex
tex-simplecv-doc-1.6-5.noarch.rpm tex-simplecv-doc = 1.6-5 = /usr/bin/texhash tetex-doc
* owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets OK (texhash). * code, not content. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
APPROVED