[Bug 480855] Review Request: bournal - Write personal, password-protected journal entries

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu May 7 10:03:40 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=480855


Christoph Wickert <fedora at christoph-wickert.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |cassmodiah at fedoraproject.or
                   |                            |g




--- Comment #5 from Christoph Wickert <fedora at christoph-wickert.de>  2009-05-07 06:03:39 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> -------REVIEW BOURNAL-------

It would ne bice to know which file was actually reviewed, because the spec
above mentions 1.3-2, but the srpm is 1.3-1. The only thing that is different
so the release, the rest of the spec is the same.

Group "Applications/Internet" seems wrong to me, I'd rather use
"Applications/Productivity" or "Applications/Text"

> --------------
> MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
> packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
> should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
> means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
> any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
> feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
> package owns, then please present that at package review time.
> OK

FAIL.

The package owns %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/, which it shouldn't, because it
belongs to hicolor-icon-theme already is a requirement of this package.

-- 
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 package-review mailing list