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-SDL - SDL bindings for the Perl language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202437 kevin@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx |kevin@xxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From kevin@xxxxxxxxx 2006-08-14 23:00 EST ------- Per talking with tibbs on IRC I am going to take over the review, as I had just started in on one just before he did. OK - Package name OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (LGPL) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: ab7fb92a1ed0db54a88839e64b9ce2c6 SDL_perl-1.20.3.tar.gz ab7fb92a1ed0db54a88839e64b9ce2c6 SDL_perl-1.20.3.tar.gz.1 OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. n/a - Package needs ExcludeArch OK - BuildRequires correct n/a - Spec handles locales/find_lang n/a - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun n/a - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Package is code or permissible content. n/a - -doc subpackage needed/used. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. n/a - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. n/a - .pc files in -devel subpackage. 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 OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - No rpmlint output. SHOULD Items: OK - Should include License or ask upstream to include it. OK - Should build in mock. Issues/Questions: 1. There is a SDL_perl 2.1.3 on CPAN: http://search.cpan.org/~dgoehrig/SDL_Perl-2.1.3/ Is that version usable for the packages that use this version? Or totally diffrent interface? If that package is imported someday would it conflict with this one? -- 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-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review