Bug 1485335

Hello,

 - Please use a more meaningful name for you archive, with:

Source0: https://github.com/squimrel/iso9660io/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

 - The BR for make is not needed, you can safely remove it.

 - You must include the LICENSE in %files:

%license LICENSE

 - You must split the main lib from the development files. For this you need to first create a -devel subpackage:

%package devel
Summary:        Headers files for developing with %{name}
Requires:       %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

%description devel
Header files for developing applications that use %{name}.

Then you add the %files section for this subpackage: the versionned *.so goes into the main lib, the unversionned .so and the headers go into the -devel subpackage:

%files
%license LICENSE
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.*

%files devel
%{_datarootdir}/pkgconfig/%{name}.pc
%{_includedir}/%{name}.h
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so

 - The changelog should contains your name and your email address:

* Fri Aug 25 2017 squimrel <squimrel> 0.0.1-1


  Also are you a member of the Packager group? Apparently you're not: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/user/view/squimrel

 To be able to continue forward, please apply to the Packager group. Read the doc here https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers

 I suggest you read carefully though the Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines

 If you do want to apply, you'll need a sponsor: please add a Blocks: FE-NEEDSPONSOR . You can then introduce yourself to fedora-devel and do informal review of other packages to show a potential sponsor that you understand the Packaging Guidelines.

Thanks for the detailed instructions. I did correct what you mentioned.

As this is a shared library package, first thing to check would be:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shared_Libraries

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.