https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2210561
Maxwell G maxwell@gtmx.me changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |maxwell@gtmx.me Status|NEW |POST Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Maxwell G maxwell@gtmx.me --- Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
- [x] The License tag reflects the package contents and uses the correct identifiers. - [x] The license text is included and marked with %license. - [x] The package builds successfully in mock. - [x] The package is installable (checked by fedora-review). - [x] There are no relevant rpmlint errors. - [-] The package runs tests in %check. NOTE: Upstream does not provide tests, but the specfile runs %pyproject_check_import which fulfills this requirement. - [x] The latest version is packaged or packaging an earlier version is justified. - [-] Libraries: The package name has a `python3-` prefix and uses the canonical project name - [x] Applications: The package follows the general Naming Guidelines for applications - [x] The pyproject macros are used. - [x] There are no bundled libraries. - [x] The package complies with the Python and general Packaging Guidelines.
Package approved! The recently deployed package review bot should open a ticket for you in the pagure.io/packager-sponsors repository for the next steps.