Smart guy. =). Set to FE-ACCEPT.

(In reply to comment #1)
> Smart guy. =). Set to FE-ACCEPT.

Maybe it's just me, but I can hardly call that a *review*... :-(

I meant that I couldn't find any errors using rpmlint and mock. Sorry if you
found my comment a bit offensive as it seems my quote failes to bring positive
appreciation.

The problem is that there is quite a bit more that should be reviewed, beside
just rpmlint errors & whether it builds correctly in mock.  There is nothing in
your comments showing that you check any of the items listed in the
PackageReview list from the wiki.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageReviewGuidelines#head-05a78c7ca440544397657679f87fbdbd84d9be28

For an example of what some other people's reviews look like, refer to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166351#c1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165952#c8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166092#c2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166409#c6

Luya, first of all I want to thank you for your work, but I'm having some
problems with your reviews too.  I joined FE just a short time before you so I
think I still have a lot to learn.  More detailed reviews would be helpful. 
This also has been mentioned on fedora-extras-list, see
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-December/msg01147.html

One package had a md5sum mismatch, that I didn't notice, the tarball had
silently been changed upstream (bug #173543).  I downloaded all sources again
and compared the sums so I'm sure they should match now, nevertheless I'd feel
more comfortable if I knew somebody else checked the md5sums too.

If anybody else would like to review (some of) my packages, he's highly welcome.
ATM there are the following packages still to be reviewed:

 bug #173549 xfce4-mount-plugin
 bug #173552 xfce4-sensors-plugin
 bug #173553 xfce4-websearch-plugin
 bug #173653 xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin
 bug #173660 xfce4-diskperf-plugin

and perhaps
 bug #173550 xfce4-netload-plugin
 bug #173661 xfce4-fsguard-plugin
which have been reviewed by Luya but lack some detailed information.

Thx everybody.

My bad. I will be carefull next time.

Detailed review (not too vague this time)
+ mock succesfully built the source package. No errors reported
+ rpmlint did not complain. No warning nor errors reported
+ package follow the PackageNameGuideline procedure:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines
+ tarball from source rpm matched source url listed on spec file. Both matched
by md5sum and sha1sum
+ No error reported after install and removed package
+ License listed on SPEC file matches the source tarball :
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Legal
+ SPEC file conform to PackagingGuideline 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines

P.S: I got a lesson to be more detailed as possible

Built fine for Core 3 and 4 on all arches, Rawhide is inconsistent atm. Closing.