tinc - Feb 2010 - Fwd: [Bug 478429] Review Request: tinc - A virtual private network daemon

Looks like tinc may start showing up in Fedora repositories?
In a testing repo for a couple weeks and if that goes well, it will be
released via standard repo?

Thanks Fabian and Felix


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:  <bugzilla at redhat.com>
Date: Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 7:03 AM
Subject: [Bug 478429] Review Request: tinc - A virtual private network daemon
To: rob.townley at gmail.com


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=478429


Felix Kaechele <felix at fetzig.org> changed:

? ? ? ? ? What ? ?|Removed ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
? ? ? ? ? ? ? Flag|fedora-review? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?|fedora-review+




--- Comment #14 from Felix Kaechele <felix at fetzig.org> ?2010-01-05
08:03:34 EDT ---
[+] source files match upstream: sha256sum
add18b68710a08dd1d209f177154f9d8c7614031050abf16139dd9c3fc56be84
tinc-1.0.11.tar.gz
add18b68710a08dd1d209f177154f9d8c7614031050abf16139dd9c3fc56be84
../SOURCES/tinc-1.0.11.tar.gz
[+] package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
[+] spec is properly named, cleanly written, and uses macros consistently.
[+] dist tag is present.
[+] build root is correct.
[+] license field matches the actual license.
[+] license is open source-compatible.
[+] license text included in package.
[+] latest version is being packaged.
[+] BuildRequires are proper.
[+] compiler flags are appropriate.
[+] %clean is present.
[+] package builds in mock.
[+] package installs properly.
[+] debuginfo package looks complete.
[+] rpmlint is silent.
[+] final provides and requires are sane
[NA] %check is present and all tests pass:
[+] no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
[+] owns the directories it creates.
[+] doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
[+] no duplicates in %files.
[+] file permissions are appropriate.
[NA] scriptlets match those on ScriptletSnippets page.
[+] code, not content.
[+] documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
[+] %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
[+] no headers.
[+] no pkgconfig files.
[+] no libtool .la droppings.
[N/A] desktop files valid and installed properly.

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.