Looks mostly OK.  Here are some comments:

1. foundry name
Probably better to prepend a foundry name:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Naming
Since there is already "levien-inconsolata-fonts", I would suggest "levien-museum-fonts".

Perhaps you could try repo-font-audit.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#2.a

2. fontconfig priority
Choose the right fontconfig priority:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fontconfig_packaging_tips#ruleset-prefix

3. BuildRoot is not necessary since F-13
You can get rid of %clean and "rm -rf %{buildroot}" in %install.

I am not sure about the correct fontconfig priority and the link in the packaging page[1][2]   is broken. 

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fontconfig_packaging_tips#ruleset-prefix
[2] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/fontconfig

I think we could use 61-64 (Low priority LGC fonts) here, while levien-inconsolata-fonts uses 75.

Anyway the correct link would be:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/fontconfig

Thanks.

I am not sure what should be the font family. I have set the font family as monospace. The rest is taken care of. 

rpmlint is complaining though.

[makerpm@susmit rpmbuild]$ rpmlint SRPMS/levien-museum-fonts-0.1-4.fc14.src.rpm 
levien-museum-fonts.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
levien-museum-fonts.src: W: no-%clean-section


The new url is:

http://susmit.fedorapeople.org/packaging/museum/levien-museum-fonts.spec

http://susmit.fedorapeople.org/packaging/museum/levien-museum-fonts-0.1-4.fc14.src.rpm

(In reply to comment #4)
 
> I have set the font family as monospace.

I think it's serif rather than monospace:
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-fonts/#serif

> levien-museum-fonts.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
> levien-museum-fonts.src: W: no-%clean-section

These warnings are harmless I think:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag

APPROVED.

Thanks.

I did not set the FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag when submitting. But to commit the package, I need someone to sponsor me.

The version should really be 1.0-1, not 0.1-4...fixed.

I have sponsored susmit now. He should now continue from step7 given in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/NewPackageProcess

Thanks a lot Parag.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: levien-museum-fonts
Short Description: A font based on historical metal Centaur fonts.
Owners: susmit
Branches: f13, f14
InitialCC: none

Oh, and "initialCC none" is not valid.  Please read and follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests exactly when submitting requests, since they are processed by scripts.  This includes not making up things like a nonexistent "none" account, thanks.

Thanks for the pointers. However, it is not clear from the guideline if InitialCC field is not needed, whether to remove the field altogether, to leave it blank or do something else. Please let me know. I shall update the wiki.

Thanks

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: levien-museum-fonts
Short Description: A font based on historical metal Centaur fonts.
Owners: susmit
Branches: f13, f14
InitialCC: fonts-bugs-lists.fedoraproject.org

I already processed the original request with a blank initialCC field.  The request you just made (although the scripts will not see it, because you did not raise the fedora-cvs flag) is also not valid, becuase "fonts-bugs-lists.fedoraproject.org" is not a valid Fedora account.

I also updated the wiki to attempt to add additional clarification, though I'm hard-pressed to understand how adding "none" was a reasonable inference from the language which was there previously.

I did not raise the flag because I found that you have already processed it. 

I was just clarifying the SCM request format, because I had a suspicion that some informations in the wiki page are wrong. 

For example, the one you just mentioned. fonts-bugs-lists.fedoraproject.org is indeed listed under: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Pseudo-users_for_SIGs. 

I do understand that it was probably meant to obfuscate the mail-id, but there are other addresses which uses @, for example, fedora-hams.

Lastly, I have no idea why I used "none". :)

The table in the wiki to which you refer shows the username on the left under the "username" heading, and (perhaps obsfucated) email addresses under the "email" heading.  The fields are documented directly above to take usernames.  I can add additional language in bold italics saying that the fields don't take email addresses, but at this point I'm not sure that it would help.  Perhaps if I underline it as well....

Closing.