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=492946
Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |akurtako(a)redhat.com
Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #9 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2009-04-03 04:56:01
EDT ---
Formal review:
# OK: rpmlint gives no warnings/errors
# OK: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
# OK: The spec file match the base package %{name}
# OK: EPL
# OK: Every subpackage has it's own license shipping with it and included in
%doc.
# OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
# OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
# OK: Fetch script shipped in the srpm.
# OK: Builds fine.
# OK: All BuildRequires and Requires are fine
# OK: Owns all folders.
# OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
# OK: Permissions on files must be set properly.
# OK: Each package must have a %clean section
# OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
# OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
# OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application.
# OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Package is good to go.
Mat, just FYI,
If this package is going to be available only F-11+, you can remove -a
"-DjavacTarget=1.5 -DjavacSource=1.5" parts. This is added automatically from
pdebuild script when needed in F-11.
--
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.