* Source url points to wrong directory. Correct is:
ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/vte/0.15/vte-0.15.2.tar.bz2

* %dir %{_libdir}/%{name} is included in both packages.

* %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/vte.pc lists more "Requires" than found in
the vte-devel package. Incomplete pkgconfig dependency chains break
all sorts of pkg-config queries. Plus: it links -lfreetype by default
(-> Requires: freetype-devel).

No, freetype is included in Requires.private only.

(In reply to comment #1)
> * Source url points to wrong directory. Correct is:
> ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/vte/0.15/vte-0.15.2.tar.bz2

Fixed in devel.

> * %dir %{_libdir}/%{name} is included in both packages.

Has already been fixed.

> * %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/vte.pc lists more "Requires" than found in
> the vte-devel package. Incomplete pkgconfig dependency chains break
> all sorts of pkg-config queries. Plus: it links -lfreetype by default
> (-> Requires: freetype-devel).

We don't require freetype anymore.

Some other issues:

- there is no URL
- no parallal make
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Parallel_make
- please use INSTALL="install -p" when running make install
- why do you enable-static and rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.a?
  please use disable-static and rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.a is not needed.

- all defattr/attr are missing the last argument:
  %defattr(-,root,root) vs %defattr(-,root,root,-)

- mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 170, tab: line 454)

- Prereq is deprecated

rpmlint complained

vte.x86_64: E: setgid-binary /usr/lib64/vte/gnome-pty-helper utmp 02711L
The file is setgid. Usually this is a packaging bug. If this is a game, then,
you should use the proper rpm group, or location.

vte.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/vte/gnome-pty-helper 02711L
A standard executable should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have a wrong executable permissions in some files
included in your package.

Unfortunately, I have no time to follow/review this package and also no response from package owner. 

Returning this back to NEW queue.

Also, Adding mclasen in case he want to clean this spec.

Adding maintainer, fresh review.

Good:

- rpmlint checks return:

vte.spec:516: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 58, tab: line 516)
The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic
annoyance.  Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both.

Trivial to fix.

vte.src: W: no-url-tag
The URL tag is missing.

I'd suggest http://developer.gnome.org/vte/.

vte-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary vte
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.

Unsure.

Lots and lots of incorrect fsf address, will be addressed when this gets updated.

vte.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/gtk-2.0/vtemodule.so vtemodule.so()(64bit)
A shared object soname provides is provided by a file in a path from which
other packages should not directly load shared objects from.  Such shared
objects should thus not be depended on and they should not result in provides
in the containing package.  Get rid of the provides if appropriate, for
example by filtering it out during build.  Note that in some cases this may
require disabling rpmbuild's internal dependency generator.

Fix or comment.

vte.x86_64: E: setgid-binary /usr/lib64/vte/gnome-pty-helper utmp 02711L
The file is setgid. Usually this is a packaging bug. If this is a game, then,
you should use the proper rpm group, or location.

vte.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/vte/gnome-pty-helper 02711L
A standard executable should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have a wrong executable permissions in some files
included in your package.

vte.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/vte/gnome-pty-helper 02711L
A standard executable should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have a wrong executable permissions in some files
included in your package.

Likely OK.

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license ( LGPLv2+ ) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file
- devel package ok
- no .la files
- post/postun ldconfig ok
- devel requires base package n-v-r 

Pretty good, let me know if you want me to commit any fixes.

Feel free to commit fixes. ;) 

Note that this package is unlikely to ever update. Newer vte has dropped support for gtk2, which this package provides. Feel free to fix the minor things.

Committed fixes.  APPROVED, closing.