Isn't Ubuntu a trademark?
Blocking FE-Legal for now, until it's clear.

Yes. This needs a few changes:

* It must be renamed to not use the Ubuntu or Canonical trademarks.
* It must not include the Ubuntu or Canonical logos at all. You cannot simply delete them, they must not be in the tarball for distribution.

Thanks Tom for your advice. I'm thinking about renaming the package simply « mono-icon-theme ». I haven't found icon themes (especially on GNOME/KDE Look) with such a name, I hope it's OK like this.

(In reply to comment #2)
> * It must be renamed to not use the Ubuntu or Canonical trademarks.
I was rethinking about this point. What about all the google-* packages in the repos? Isn't Google a TM?

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > * It must be renamed to not use the Ubuntu or Canonical trademarks.
> I was rethinking about this point. What about all the google-* packages in the
> repos? Isn't Google a TM?

It is, but in those cases, it has nothing to do with the look or feel of Google, and also, Google is not a Linux distribution. This is an area where we need to be especially careful.

(In reply to comment #5)
> It is, but in those cases, it has nothing to do with the look or feel of
> Google, and also, Google is not a Linux distribution. This is an area where we
> need to be especially careful.
Thanks for this clarification. I will submit very soon a « clean » package.

Spec URL:
http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/mono-icon-theme/mono-icon-theme.spec
SRPM URL:
http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/mono-icon-theme/mono-icon-theme-0.0.37-2.fc16.src.rpm

I've also removed the dependency on fedora-logos and the Ubuntu logos substitution by the Fedora ones:
- depending on fedora-logos is probably too strict for those who don't/can't have fedora-logos installed (cf generic-logos)
- the theme inherits from gnome-icon-themes which provides its own distributor logos; by the way, the Fedora logo isn't visible on a GNOME 3 desktop session.

(I forgot to mention that the package has been renamed to "mono-icon-theme").

You'll also want to rename the top-level directory inside the source tarball to match the spec file name.

Also, I don't think we want to package the ubuntuone-client-* artwork or the dropboxstatus-* artwork, as we ship neither of these proprietary items.

With those items removed, I think I can lift the legal block here.

Since a mono-icon-theme package already exists in the Fedora repos, the package will be finally renamed to "monochrome-icon-theme". There is no reference to any Ubuntu item anymore in this update.

Spec URL:
http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/monochrome-icon-theme/monochrome-icon-theme.spec
SRPM URL:
http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/monochrome-icon-theme/monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.37-3.fc16.src.rpm

There is still one reference to Ubuntu, in the Summary field. Please remove it, then I can let this one go to review.

I hope it's OK know :)

Spec URL:
http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/monochrome-icon-theme/monochrome-icon-theme.spec
SRPM URL:
http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/monochrome-icon-theme/monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.37-4.fc16.src.rpm

Lifting FE-Legal.

Koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3494431

$ rpmlint -i -v *
monochrome-icon-theme.src: I: checking
monochrome-icon-theme.src: I: checking-url https://launchpad.net/ubuntu-mono (timeout 10 seconds)
monochrome-icon-theme.src: W: invalid-url Source0: monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.37.tar.bz2
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

monochrome-icon-theme.noarch: I: checking
monochrome-icon-theme.noarch: I: checking-url https://launchpad.net/ubuntu-mono (timeout 10 seconds)
monochrome-icon-theme.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.37.tar.bz2
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

The warnings due to an invalid URL could be ignored, as already discussed in bug #744944.

---------------------------------
key:

[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
---------------------------------

[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
    GPLv2
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[.] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
    Due to that the original tarball needs to be re-packed to remove
copyrighted
    files, it is impossible to verify the checksums. The bzip2 stack doesn't 
    work always identically. 

[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
    - Succesful Koji build available.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[+] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[.] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
    separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream...
[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
    See Koji build above (which uses mock anyway)
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
    Tested in F15. Works as expected.
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ...
[.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.


----------------

PACKAGE APPROVED

----------------

Thanks for this review :-)

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: monochrome-icon-theme
Short Description: Icons for the panel, designed in a simplified monochrome style
Owners: melmorabity
Branches: f15 f16
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.38-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.38-1.fc16

monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.38-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.

monochrome-icon-theme-0.0.38-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.