Review coming....

Correct SRPM URL: http://herlo.fedorapeople.org/rpms/chisholm-rubbing-fonts-20090125-1.fc9.src.rpm

OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
NO - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License
OK - License field in spec matches
Embedded in font - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
faf9b021e799e6eddd5e6c0b3089a3f0  ruf.upstream.zip
faf9b021e799e6eddd5e6c0b3089a3f0  ruf.zip
N/A - Package needs ExcludeArch
OK - BuildRequires correct
N/A - Spec handles locales/find_lang
N/A - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
N/A - Doc subpackage needed/used.
N/A - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

N/A - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
N/A - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
N/A - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
N/A - .so files in -devel subpackage.
N/A - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
N/A - .la files are removed.

N/A - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file

Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1143839
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
SEE ABOVE - No rpmlint output.
$ rpmlint *
chisholm-rubbing-fonts.src: E: invalid-spec-name
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.

OK - final provides and requires are sane:

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should function as described.
OK - Should have sane scriptlets.
OK - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
OK - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)

Issues:

1. Spec file name doesn't match the base package name - needs to be renamed

Corrected spec file name. New spec file and SRPM uploaded.

Spec URL: http://herlo.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubbing-fonts.spec
SRPM URL: http://herlo.fedorapeople.org/rpms/chisholm-rubbing-fonts-20090125-2.fc9.src.rpm

Real Spec URL: http://herlo.fedorapeople.org/rpms/chisholm-rubbing-fonts.spec

Looks good to me, this package is APPROVED.

Just a nitpicking

The font declares itself as "Rubbing Font". That's what fontconfig and apps will see, so that's also what you need to use in your fontconfig rules

(I agree the "Font" bit is quite silly and upstream would be well advised to drop it)

BTW, there are a few minor template changes in fontpackages-devel 1.20, but nothing dangerous and your current spec will also work fine.

Cool.  Jay, please apply for the 'packager' group in FAS and I'll sponsor you.

Thanks for everything, and it was great meeting you!

Enjoyed meeting you all too. Very worth while afternoon.
What about the comments form Nicolas Mailhot? Presumably I need to re-do the fontconfig file?

Also forgive my ignorance but remind me what/where FAS is again?

(In reply to comment #9)
> Enjoyed meeting you all too. Very worth while afternoon.
> What about the comments form Nicolas Mailhot? Presumably I need to re-do the
> fontconfig file?

If you want it to actually do something, yet
 
> Also forgive my ignorance but remind me what/where FAS is again?  

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Joining_the_Fonts_SIG

(I apologize for the long time I spent not checking if this review progressed)

And I'm very sorry for it being buried in a mess of bugzilla mail on my side, let me know if you need any help getting this into shape, I'm available for wahtever help you might need.

I've been pretty much swamped myself so no biggie. I've updated the font config and spec files and rebuilt the SRPM to include the changes but I don't have anywhere to upload the files to for review (someone did this for me on the day). Can I e-mail them to one of you to upload?

You can always attach the text files (not the full srpm) to this bug.

Otherwise if you've completed FAS you probably have a fedorapeople hosting space (or can ask for one on #fedora-admin)

I had sent Jay an email on an acct that I had setup for him.  You can't get fedorapeople until you're in CLA+1, right now he's CLA only :/

Uploaded r3 of SRPM and .spec file to http://i.am.jds2001.org/~ukjay

SRPM: http://i.am.jds2001.org/~ukjay/chisholm-rubbing-fonts-20090125-3.fc9.src.rpm
SPEC: http://i.am.jds2001.org/~ukjay/chisholm-rubbing-fonts.spec

Thanks for your help.

@jay: this package has been approved a long time ago, do you still need help to push it fedora-side?

Created attachment 395620 [details]
Font config file for chisholm rubbing font

Created attachment 395621 [details]
SPEC file for chisholm rubbing font

Wow! Apologies, really thought I'd finished this up at the time. I've attached the font config and spec files and the SRPM is available here: http://i.am.jds2001.org/~ukjay/chisholm-rubbing-fonts-20090125-3.fc9.src.rpm

Is that all you need?

Jay, are you still around? This package was approved over two years ago, and still hasn't been built for Fedora.

Please take a look at this page:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers

Your sponsor can help if you are unsure how to import your srpm into Fedora git.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews

Closing as submitter has left, even though package is approved.

Note for anyone else wanting to pick this up: fontlint shows that Rubbing Font has a number of problems that cause it to not work well in Inkscape or Fontmatrix, so you might be dealing with bug reports very soon after release.