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: perl-Expect - Expect for Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191622
tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2006-05-16 14:13 EST ------- That description is really suboptimal. How about something like this, partially stolen from the original Expect description:
This module provides Expect-like functionality to Perl. Expect is a tool for automating interactive applications such as telnet, ftp, passwd, fsck, rlogin, tip, etc.
Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: f5f0ea179c6f19d9f08e22c6a0072292 Expect-1.16.tar.gz f5f0ea179c6f19d9f08e22c6a0072292 Expect-1.16.tar.gz-srpm * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass: Passed 36 of 36 tests. * 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. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app.
APPROVED, but please fix the description before checking in.