[Bug 479953] Review Request: gtksourceviewmm - C++ wrapper for the gtksourceview widget library
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Jan 15 17:48:32 UTC 2009
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=479953
Jochen Schmitt <jochen at herr-schmitt.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt <jochen at herr-schmitt.de> 2009-01-15 12:48:30 EDT ---
Good:
+ Name of the package fits naming guidelines
+ Version of the tar ball matches with package version
+ Packaged version is the most current release of the application
+ Package contains a valid license tag
+ License tag contains GPLv2+ as an valid OSS license
+ Package contains verbatin copy of the license text
+ Source in package matches with upstream
(md5sum: 2306402f31dff1cb9d3d664aa9153c28)
+ Consistently usage of rpm macros
+ Package contains devel subpackage
+ Devel subpackage containts proper Req. to main package
+ Package contains no patches
+ %setup use -q flag
+ BUILDROOT will cleaned on the beginning of %install and %clean
+ Local build works fine
+ Build use %{_smp_flags]
+ Build use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+ Local install works fine
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for installed package
+ Local uninstall works file
+ Koji build works file
+ Package contains dlconfig scriptlets
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for source rpm
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for the binary rpm
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for the debuginfo rpm
+ Debuginfo rpm contains source files
+ Packaged files doesN't belongs to another package
+ Packaged files have proper file permissions
+ %doc stanza is small, so we need no extra doc subpackage
+ %changelog has a proper format
*** APPROVED ***
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list