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.brown...@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(john.brown...@gma | |il.com) | --- Comment #2 from TK009 <john.brown...@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? -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
