[Bug 673197] Review Request: perl-Perl-Critic-Bangs - Collection of handy Perl::Critic policies

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=673197

Marcela MaÅlÃÅovà <mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from Marcela MaÅlÃÅovà <mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-03-07 08:51:53 EST ---
- rpmlint OK
- package must be named according to Guidelines OK
- spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK
- package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK
- package must be licensed with Fedora approved license OK
- license field must match actual license OK
 (GPL+ or Artistic 2.0 in main pm file, in other files are GPLv3 or Artistic
2.0)
- text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK
- sources must match the upstream source OK
- package MUST successfully compile and build OK
- architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK
- build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
- handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK
- shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK
- packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK
- package must own all directories that it creates OK
- permissions on files must be set properly OK
- package must consistently use macros OK
- package must contain code, or permissable content OK
- large documentation must go in a -doc OK
- %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK
- header files must be in a -devel package OK
- static libraries must be in a -static package OK
- library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK
- devel package usually require base package OK
- packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK
- GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK
- packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK

rpm -qp --provides perl-Perl-Critic-Bangs-1.06-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 
perl(Perl::Critic::Bangs) = 1.06
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy::Bangs::ProhibitCommentedOutCode) = 1.06
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy::Bangs::ProhibitFlagComments) = 1.06
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy::Bangs::ProhibitNoPlan) = 1.06
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy::Bangs::ProhibitNumberedNames) = 1.06
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy::Bangs::ProhibitRefProtoOrProto) = 1.06
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy::Bangs::ProhibitUselessRegexModifiers) = 1.06
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy::Bangs::ProhibitVagueNames) = 1.06
perl-Perl-Critic-Bangs = 1.06-1.fc14

rpm -qp --requires perl-Perl-Critic-Bangs-1.06-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)  
perl(Perl::Critic) >= 1.098
perl(Perl::Critic::Policy)  
perl(Perl::Critic::Utils)  
perl(Perl::Critic::Utils::PPIRegexp)  
perl(Readonly)  
perl(Test::More)  
perl(Test::Perl::Critic) >= 1.01
perl(base)  
perl(strict)  
perl(warnings)  
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1

ACCEPT (after build pass in koji, blocking package is still not in buildroot)

-- 
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



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]