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: sub2srt - Convert files in .sub format to .srt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246302 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-06-29 18:41 EST ------- There's no reason for the explicit dependency on perl; rpm finds that on its own. I don't think it's a blocker, though, merely redundant. Review: * source files match upstream: 777fbd9d78cc8a47b926ad03a9b05bf3b1ec09055b9694edeac8b5b4475dc63e sub2srt-0.5.3.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none) * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: sub2srt = 0.5.3-1.fc8 = /usr/bin/perl ? perl (unnecessary) perl(Getopt::Long) perl(strict) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. It does run OK, though I have no files to test it with. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review