https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1073978
--- Comment #6 from Kalev Lember <kalevlem...@gmail.com> --- So, you are a new packager. Welcome to Fedora, Adrien! I hope you'll enjoy this. As a new packager, you'll need to get sponsored into the packager group. This is a one time process and it's much easier to get other packages in once you've cleared this initial step and are part of the packager group. All packagers are also automatically reviewers, so it's expected that everyone knows how to perform package reviews. It's common to ask for new people to show their understanding of the packaging guidelines by asking them to perform one package review. Could you choose a ticket of your liking from the list in http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html and go through the package review checklist in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines and post your findings in the ticket? Regarding the package here, I've taken a quick look and it looks nice and clean. Good work! One thing I've noticed is that the source files don't have license headers. It would be great if you could add them upstream as per https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html#SEC4 Fedora is quite strict with legal matters and things that concern licensing. In the licensing FAQ, there's a long section what to do when there's only a COPYING file and no license headers: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ#How_do_I_figure_out_what_version_of_the_GPL.2FLGPL_my_package_is_under.3F It's probably easier to just add the license headers and clear any confusion with that. The spec file looks largely fine. I have some nitpick comments below: > License: GPLv2 Is it GPLv2 or GPLv2+ ? The rpm spec file and the PKG-INFO file seem to disagree. And no license headers in the .py files to double check this. > %setup -q -n %{name}-%{version} Remove the "-n %{name}-%{version}" part, that's the default. > desktop-file-install --vendor="" \ > --dir=%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/ \ > %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop It would be better to use desktop-file-validate here. desktop-file-install is mostly for if you need to edit the .desktop file (e.g. add or remove a category), or when you are including an external desktop file that doesn't come from upstream. None of this applies here. Also, I see you've done a few changes to the upstream tarball without changing the version. It's better to bump the version each time you need to roll a new release. It can be very confusing for other people if a tarball with the same version gets silently replaced. http://www.scrye.com/wordpress/nirik/2014/03/11/just-say-no-to-re-releasing-the-same-version-of-software/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review