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: python-tgexpandingformwidget - A repeating form widget for TurboGears https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427275 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-17 17:00 EST ------- I think you can rremove the pyver macro from the top of the spec, as it seems to be unused. Shouldn't this have a dependency on TurboGears in some fashion? rpmbuild doesn't really generate proper dependencies for python code, so you have to do it manually. On the other hand, maybe it doesn't need TG; I'm honestly not an expert, so I'll leave it to you. Please use either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT but not both in the same specfile. That's an easy fix, so I'll approve this package and you can fix it when you check in. Checklist: * source files match upstream: 5faa544f0ec0ea914b4b4719b3a8f54a1be732bf302b7ae918715f460c621b63 TGExpandingFormWidget-0.1.3.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named and is cleanly written X specfile does not use macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * 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 (maybe needs turbogears) python-tgexpandingformwidget = 0.1.3-4.fc9 = python(abi) = 2.5 * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. APPROVED; just s/\$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{buildroot}/ when you check in. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
