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=478388 Rakesh Pandit <rpan...@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org |rpan...@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #15 from Rakesh Pandit <rpan...@redhat.com> 2010-01-08 02:38:32 EDT --- [x] - Ok, [-] Needs input, [na] - Not Applicable [x] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1908693 - Builds fine [x] rpmlint complains about patch not applied udav.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch1: udav-help-path.patch ignore as you are moving in tmp and doing some sed and applying it. [-] License: what is license of png files ? May you confirm from upstream ? There are few svg files in template folder also ? Why are they used for ? What are pascal files in that folder for ? License field says license is GPLv2 but src files say it could be later also so correct license field should be GPLv2+ and license of picture files ? May you investiagete here and contact upstream to clearly mention the license information in readme files or some place. [x] Name fine [x] spec name file [x] optflags usage fine [-] short name for icon does not need extension so change it to 'Icon=udav' (png is assumed by default) value "udav.png" for key "Icon" in group "Desktop Entry" is an icon name with an extension, but there should be no extension as described in the Icon Theme Specification if the value is not an absolute path [-] key "Encoding" in group "Desktop Entry" is deprecated [-] desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/foo.desktop run this in spec and you can get warnings easily [x] symlink uses absolute path [-] Check with upstream about patches. One of them seems to be fedora specific mention that in spec file. Provide necessary reference to your interaction with upstream also if possible. Have you also reported about inclusion of desktop file in upstream code base ? [x] all folders owned by package [x] timestamps are being saved [x] source is from upstream 5d857ded986d65613d8a0f5d482ea33baf30f1b1 (sha1sum matches) [x] use example_mgl_eng.html in docs [-] man page does seem to be included, it is present in udav [-] Why are you not installing icons in %{_datadir}/icons/ and using icon cache ? [x] spec file is in american english and legible [x] debuginfo file is fine [x] successfully compiles on primary archs [x] BR fine [na] no locales [x] %file section seems to be ok [x] valid file names May you have a look at issues I mentioned ? Thanks, -- 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-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review