Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566687 Iain Arnell <iarnell@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell <iarnell@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-02-22 06:43:49 EST --- This one also needs the PERL5_CPANPLUS_IS_RUNNING=1 tweak to build in mock (locally, f14, with perl-Olson-Abbreviations and perl-MooseX-Types-DateTime-ButMaintained installed). Source tarball matches upstream: d8142d7f7b08af18de6d302da8d7f7b9 MooseX-Types-DateTimeX-0.06.tar.gz Spec looks sane, clean and consistent; license is correct (GPL+ or Artistic); make test passes cleanly. Final provides are sane: perl(MooseX::Types::DateTimeX) = 0.06 perl-MooseX-Types-DateTimeX = 0.06-2.fc14 Final requires are sane: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1) perl(DateTime) perl(DateTime::Duration) perl(DateTimeX::Easy) perl(MooseX::Types) perl(MooseX::Types::DateTime::ButMaintained) perl(MooseX::Types::Moose) perl(Time::Duration::Parse) perl(namespace::clean) perl(strict) perl(warnings) Final conflicts are appropriate and necessary: perl(MooseX::Types::DateTime) < 0.05 rpmlint is silent. I think you should add an explicit 'Requires: perl(Moose) >= 0.41' since it's not automatically picked up (even though it gets pulled in by other deps, I think it's better to mention it here too). And you need the PERL5_CPANPLUS_IS_RUNNING hack to build in mock. With those two conditions, APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review