[Bug 466237] Review Request: perl-File-Comments - Recognizes file formats and extracts format-specific comments

[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=466237


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

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




--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx>  2008-11-04 15:13:43 EDT ---
I took this and then promptly went out of town.  Sorry about that; I thought I
would have time to finish it up before I left.

rpmlint does complain about all of the executable documentation.  The scripts
do generate an additional dependency on perl(Getopt::Std) which would not be
there if the documentation wasn't executable.  Since this happens to be
provided by the base Perl package currently I guess it isn't really
problematic.

* source files match upstream:
   770bf884c44b3346f7240d173235e27e5022d0277346845eda4187f858ea5fed  
   File-Comments-0.07.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 not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
O rpmlint has complaints about executable documentation.
O final provides and requires (extra Getopt::Std dependency):
   perl(File::Comments) = 0.07
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin)
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::C) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::HTML) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::Java) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::JavaScript)
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::Makefile) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::PHP) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::Perl) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::Python) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::Shell) = 0.01
   perl(File::Comments::Target)
   perl-File-Comments = 0.07-1.fc10
  =
   /usr/bin/perl
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
   perl(File::Basename)
   perl(File::Comments)
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin)
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::C)
   perl(File::Comments::Plugin::Makefile)
O  perl(Getopt::Std)
   perl(HTML::TokeParser)
   perl(Log::Log4perl)
   perl(Sysadm::Install)
   perl(strict)
   perl(warnings)

* %check is present and all tests pass:
  All tests successful.
  Files=9, Tests=75,  2 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr  0.02 sys +  1.05 cusr  0.12 
   csys =  1.23 CPU)

* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
O file permissions are acceptable (documentation is executable, not causing 
   extra packages to be pulled in)
* no generically named files
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

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.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

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