http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440
--- Comment #4 from Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com> 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.