Here are some comments copied from my mailing list post:

No %{?dist} tag, but I understand why you folks have no need of that.

Is the source available for download anywhere?  The Source0: URL
should be downloadable if at all possible.  The spec should at minimum
include some instructions for checking out of an SCM.

As of FC-5, it is not actually necessary to have:
  Requires(post): desktop-file-utils >= %{desktopfileutilsver}
  Requires(postun): desktop-file-utils >= %{desktopfileutilsver}
as long as you use the recommended update-desktop-database
scriptlets.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database

%post
/usr/bin/update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications &> /dev/null || :

%postun
/usr/bin/update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications &> /dev/null || :

Is there any reason to keep this bit:
%triggerun -- anaconda < 8.0-1
/sbin/chkconfig --del reconfig >/dev/null 2>&1 || :

Anaconda < 8.0 was, what, pre-RHL-8?

There's some minor permission weirdness, like
/usr/lib/anaconda-runtime/boot/syslinux.cfg and
/usr/lib/anaconda-runtime/pyrc.py are executable, and also
some shell scripts that don't have a shebang line like
/usr/lib/anaconda-runtime/mk-images.s390.  I'll spare everyone here
the full listing; just run rpmlint and look at the
script-without-shebang errors.

(In reply to comment #1)

Thanks! I've addressed all your comments in 11.5.0.4, which should be in the next rawhide push.

> Is the source available for download anywhere?  The Source0: URL
> should be downloadable if at all possible.  The spec should at minimum
> include some instructions for checking out of an SCM.
> 

Done

> As of FC-5, it is not actually necessary to have:
>   Requires(post): desktop-file-utils >= %{desktopfileutilsver}
>   Requires(postun): desktop-file-utils >= %{desktopfileutilsver}
> as long as you use the recommended update-desktop-database
> scriptlets.
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database
> 
> %post
> /usr/bin/update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications &> /dev/null || :
> 
> %postun
> /usr/bin/update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications &> /dev/null || :
> 

Fixed.

> Is there any reason to keep this bit:
> %triggerun -- anaconda < 8.0-1
> /sbin/chkconfig --del reconfig >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
> 

Removed.

> Anaconda < 8.0 was, what, pre-RHL-8?
> 
> There's some minor permission weirdness, like
> /usr/lib/anaconda-runtime/boot/syslinux.cfg and
> /usr/lib/anaconda-runtime/pyrc.py are executable, and also
> some shell scripts that don't have a shebang line like
> /usr/lib/anaconda-runtime/mk-images.s390.  I'll spare everyone here
> the full listing; just run rpmlint and look at the
> script-without-shebang errors.

I've fixed most rpmlint nagging, remaining:

anaconda.src:205: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/anaconda
anaconda.src:206: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/anaconda-runtime
* python code, so no need for lib64

anaconda.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/anaconda-11.5.0.3/ChangeLog
* automatically generated from git commit messages later ones are all UTF-8,
  cannot use iconv, as newer parts are already UTF-8, cannot manually fix as
  generated on the fly.

anaconda.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libbdevid-python
anaconda.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libuser-python
anaconda.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libxml2-python

These are actually all python bindings, and this are not explicit-lib-dependencies.

Yes, the explicit lib dependency bits are obviously bogus and you can't really fix the changelog.  The hardcoded-library-path complaints are bogus as well.  That clears rpmlint.

The other issues have all been fixed, so I'd say we're done.  Thanks for your attention.

APPROVED

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: anaconda
New Branches: f18-beta
Owners: bcl clumens
InitialCC: 

We need a branch in order to do a new beta build for secondary arches.

Is a branch needed, or a buildroot tag in koji?

Just a branch, thanks.