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=459177 --- Comment #9 from Rob Crittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-08 10:37:47 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for RPM - Source0 is still incorrect + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License not included in source, not in rpm either. + %doc files present. + BuildRequires are proper. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears consistent. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. APPROVED if you fix the Source0 before committing the package. I built and installed the missing dependencies and was able to use tg-admin to quickstart a new project and verified that it started and served at least the root page. -- 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
