http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440
--- Comment #4 from Andrea Musuruane <[email protected]> 2009-03-16 16:43:44 --- Some comments: * You should specify a version to checkout from upstream VCS. Otherwise the reviewer cannot be sure to compare/recreate the same exact version you used. Place this details above the Source tag. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control * Some BR are not required: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2 * Do not strip binaries! Otherwise the debuginfo package is useless: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Debuginfo * Avoid using dos2unix. Use sed instead: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Rpmlint_Errors * I see that you use the %{__xxx} macro style. Even though this is not a bug and it is not required that you change it, I suggest you not to use this style because it is not very readable. I cannot think of a good reason to use it instead of just using "xxx". A complete discussion about these case has been discussed in fedora-devel-list: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-December/msg01855.html * The icon cache scriptlets are not the same used by the Fedora guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache I haven't checked every requirements but the spec file is quite good as a first release from a rookie :) Unluckily I'm not a sponsor and therefore I cannot sponsor you. I suggest you to do "informal" reviews of other packages to show your understanding of Fedora guidelines to potential sponsors. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
