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=664912 --- Comment #15 from Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-01-16 08:27:43 EST --- (In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #13) > > FIX: Augment description text to cover this package. Current sentence talks > > about different Perl package only. > This is upstream's description, as cpanspec had extracted it. > I can add the next line from upstream's desciption, if you like this better. > I know, cpanspec takes first paragraph only which is not good enough in this case. Adding the second paragraph from upstream POD would be great to make the description useful for RPM users. > > FIX: Build-require perl(Carp) (lib/HTML/TreeBuilder/LibXML/Node.pm:4). > > TODO: Build-require perl(base) (lib/HTML/TreeBuilder/LibXML.pm:6) > perl(base) is never going to move outside of the perl package. Until it get superseded by `parent' module. Or become dual-lived in Fedora because `base' lives on CPAN already. > And even if, this will be causing an FTBS, which can be fixed then. > Which is good reason to add add it now to prevent FTBS in the future. > Enforcing BR: perl(base) is bureacratic nit-pickery. > I know. Thus I marked it as `TODO'. In contrast to perl(Carp) I evaluated as `FIX' because it has already lived dual in Fedora. > > TODO: Remove useless %defattr from %files section. > Will not do so - %defattr is still allowed, not using it is not mandated. > You are enforcing a non existing rule. > Your choice which I respect (see, this is `TODO', not a `FIX'). The non-existing rule is to keep spec file as minimal as possible. There is no reason to keep a line which is equivalent to empty line. Or would you append an poetry to the spec file? This is also not forbidden. > > Resolution: Package NOT approved. > > Petr, some open and direct words: In case you're not aware about it, the style > of your reviews is hardly bearable and childishly pedantic. That's purpose of a review. To criticize anything that diverts a package from the ideal and to assure Fedora will deliver high-quality packages. > It is driving people away from Fedora. Better smaller good distribution than bigger crappy one. -- 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