http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=802
Jochen Schmitt <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #15 from Jochen Schmitt <[email protected]> 2009-10-13 21:28:47 --- Good: + Package name fullfill naming guidelines. + Package contains recent stable release of the application + URL on the URL tag shows on proper project homepage + Package contains several subpackages + License tag contains IBM as a valid OSS license. So we can put this package into the free branch of rpmfusion. + Copyright note on the top of the source files matches with license tag + Could download upstream package via spectool -g + Package tar ball matches with upstream one (md5sum: 375721949e33a91aa62e006f2ba7b3e) + Local build works without failure + Rpmlint is quite on source rpm + Debuginfo package contains sources + Build on mock works fine + All package are owned by the package + Not file belog to another package. Bad: - Don't make a build with bundled libraries. Please remove the bundled libraries and make a build agains the existing system libaries - Please use %{_sysconfdir} instead of /etc - Build didn't hournour the $RPM_OPT_FLGS during the build - make haven't %{?_smp_mflags}. If the build is not SMP compilant please at a comment and open a upstream bug report - It's not recommented to use the %makeinstall macro. - Package don't contains verbatin copy of the license text. Please contact upstream to include one. (No Blocker) - Please fix the knewn rpmlint issues. - Please add a ChangeLog entry for each new release - Package should not contains static libraries - Coult not test install, because openafs kmod is not available. - We prefer to use %defattr(-,root,root,-) -- 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.
