[Bug 728296] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-WebKit - Web content engine library for Gtk2

[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=728296

Haïkel Guémar <karlthered@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from Haïkel Guémar <karlthered@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-08-05 04:07:57 EDT ---
perl-Gtk2-WebKit (Perl package)

MUST: rpmlint must be run on src.rpm and rpm.  OK
$ rpmlint -iv perl-Gtk2-WebKit-0.09-1.fc15.src.rpm
perl-Gtk2-WebKit.src: I: checking
perl-Gtk2-WebKit.src: I: checking-url http://search.cpan.org/dist/Gtk2-WebKit/
(timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Gtk2-WebKit.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/Gtk2/Gtk2-WebKit-0.09.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint -iv perl-Gtk2-WebKit-0.09-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm
perl-Gtk2-WebKit.x86_64: I: checking
perl-Gtk2-WebKit.x86_64: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Gtk2-WebKit/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Gtk2-WebKit.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Gtk2/WebKit/Install/webkit-autogen.h
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.

1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

According perl SIG packaging guidelines, C headers in binary module packages
are OK

MUST: package named accordingly to package naming guidelines. OK 

MUST: spec file name match %{name}  OK

MUST: package meets packaging guidelines OK

MUST: package must be licensed under a fedora-compliant license OK (LGPLv2+)

MUST: License field in package spec match actual license OK
Note: no license file was included, i checked directly on CPAN

MUST: spec in legible american english OK

MUST: sources provided match upstream's OK

provided sources sha1sum: fb16b7be71c9c80c2fed8737605572ac7e54ce51
upstream sources sha1sum: fb16b7be71c9c80c2fed8737605572ac7e54ce51

MUST: package successfully compiles on at least one primary architecture (all
of them) OK

MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BR OK

MUST: package must own all directories it creates OK

MUST: package does not list a file more than once in %files section OK

MUST: permissions are properly set OK

MUST: package consistenly use macros OK

MUST: package contains permissable content OK

MUST: package does not own directories owned by other packages OK

MUST: all filenames in package are valid UTF-8 OK

SHOULD: packager should request upstream to include a proper license file
NOTABLOCKER

SHOULD: mock builds were done for fedora 16 on all primary architectures
(x86/x86_64) OK
scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3253746

SHOULD: the module provided works (tested with gtest) OK

SHOULD: man pages are provided OK


This package respect general & Perl Fedora Packaging guidelines so i hereby
approve the inclusion into Fedora Packages Collection.
Don't forget to ask upstream to add license file.

-- 
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]