https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366047
--- Comment #4 from l...@us.ibm.com --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #3) > The spec file and srpm should be available directly, so that automatic tools > like fedora-review can download it without issues. Please, just avoid > sf.net. If you don't have any public web space available, you can ask for > fp.o account > (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/fedorapeople.org). > > Summary should not repeat the package name, it should say what the package > is in a few words. The %description should describe the functionality in > two-three paragraphs. Also not everybody knows what TSS/TCG/TPM is, so the > abbrevs should be expanded. See 'rpm -qi python' for a reasonable template. > > It's good practice to explicitly list files in %{_bindir} and %{_libdir}, > instead of using a wide pattern like %{_bindir}/*. Hi Zbignlew, Thanks for your comments! Given that there are 95 executables under the %{_bindir} in this case, do we still want to explicitlly list all files? Vicky -- 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
