Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-04-07 17:52 EST ------- Package builds fine in mock and rpmlint is silent. Issues: Can't check a couple of things due to lack of SRPM. %description seems to be from another package. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. X specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. However, the description seems to be the one from the perl-Finance-Quote package. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. X can't check whether source file matches upstream without SRPM. * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/HTML, which will probably also be owned by any module under the HTML:: namespace. However, there are no dependencies which could create this directory so there is no alternative but for this package to own it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
