Hi Florin - thanks for submitting this.  Here are some initial comments.

* desktop_vendor is no longer planetccrma.  
* For Source0, can you please put the full URL to the tarball?
* See the section "Handling Locale Files" in 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
  We'll need to replace the "%{_datadir}/locale/*/LC_MESSAGES/jamin.mo"
  in %files with the find_lang stuff described in the wiki.

Also...

# rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/jamin-0.95.0-4.src.rpm 
W: jamin mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 60, tab: line 1)

I don't know where this is coming from.  The spec file maybe?

AG

(In reply to comment #1)
> * desktop_vendor is no longer planetccrma.  

fixed

> * For Source0, can you please put the full URL to the tarball?

fixed

> * See the section "Handling Locale Files" in 
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
>   We'll need to replace the "%{_datadir}/locale/*/LC_MESSAGES/jamin.mo"
>   in %files with the find_lang stuff described in the wiki.

fixed

> # rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/jamin-0.95.0-4.src.rpm 
> W: jamin mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 60, tab: line 1)

fixed

I don't know if I have to bump the Release number after every rebuild like this,
so I'm just using the same number. Just re-download the same files from the URLs
above.
In the future, I will update the Release number if that's what's needed.

Here's my review.  Note the single line with an X.  I would approve this package
once the Source0 line is tweaked, however I believe that we need to find a
sponsor for you since, from what I can tell, this appears to be your first
contribution.  
I've added a bugzilla dependency on FE-NEEDSPONSOR for now.

Also, my personal preference is to boost the release number on every update
during the review, but I don't think that's a requirement.

* package meets and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
  (This is a total nit-pick, but my personal preference is to align
   spec file field values like so...
http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/zynaddsubfx.spec )
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* License text included in package.
X source files match upstream (extracted from upstream cvs so no md5sum available.)
$ md5sum jamin-0.95.0.tar.gz /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/jamin-0.95.0.tar.gz 
032f2a4a578a8938f76282112d56c8d6  jamin-0.95.0.tar.gz
032f2a4a578a8938f76282112d56c8d6  /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/jamin-0.95.0.tar.gz

However, the source URL didn't work for me.  But this one does...
http://umn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/jamin/jamin-0.95.0.tar.gz

* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires and requires look sane:
jamin-0.95.0-4.fc6.i386.rpm
  jamincont_1912.so  
  jamin = 0.95.0-4
====
  hicolor-icon-theme
  ladspa-swh-plugins >= 0.4.7
  libatk-1.0.so.0
  libcairo.so.2
  libfftw3f.so.3
  libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0
  libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0
  libglib-2.0.so.0
  libgmodule-2.0.so.0
  libgobject-2.0.so.0
  libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  libjack.so.0
  liblo >= 0.15
  liblo.so.0
  libpango-1.0.so.0
  libpangocairo-1.0.so.0
  libpthread.so.0
  libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0)
  libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.1)
  libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2)
  libxml2.so.2
* shared libraries are present, but no ldconfig required (it's a ladspa plugin).
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* %check is not present
* scriptlets OK
* code, not content.
* docs look fine (there's no JAMin manual, right?)
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* .desktop file required, and it looks ifne.
* not a web app.

Just to confirm...

No one has reviewed this for 3 months. Florin, 
do you still want to import this to Fedora?

This is just I want to make it sure if you are
still watching this review request.

(In reply to comment #2)
> I don't know if I have to bump the Release number after every rebuild like
> this, so I'm just using the same number. 
You *have to*.

Well, from just I glanced at your spec file:
* Source URL
  - Please refer to
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
    for sourceforge.net source URL

* Using autotool
  - Generally calling autotool is not preferred for
    several reasons.
    If possible, patch against configure, not configure.in,
    for example

* Deprecated categories
  - Categories "Application" "X-Fedora" are both deprecated
    for desktop file categories and should be removed.

* Directory ownership
  - _Perhaps_ %{_libdir}/ladspa is not owned by any package
    (I have not tried to rebuild this package)

* %exclude
  - Please don't use %exclude when it can. Just remove
    the file at %install stage.

* Mimeinfo
  - Please check "mimeinfo" section of
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets

ping again?

one more ping?

I will close this bug as NOTABUG if no response from
reporter (submitter) is received in one week.

Closing as NOTABUG.

Please file a new review request if someone wants to
repackage and resubmit this software. Thank you!