[Bug 196617] Review Request: perl-File-chdir - Perl module for local chdir()

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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-File-chdir - Perl module for local chdir()

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196617

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-06-26 11:23 EST -------
I'm not sure why you have "CHECK(GPL or Artistic)" as the license.  "GPL or
Artistic" is correct.  (Perhaps it's cpanspec doing that?)

You should capitalize the summary.

rpmlint complains about these:
W: perl-File-chdir summary-not-capitalized a more sensible way to change directories
W: perl-File-chdir invalid-license CHECK(GPL or Artistic)

Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
X license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  License text not included upstream. 
* source files match upstream:
   41a4661789f6de97fb632e4560d37864  File-chdir-0.06.tar.gz
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
X rpmlint is not silent
* final provides and requires are sane:
   perl(File::chdir) = 0.06
   perl(File::chdir::ARRAY)
   perl(File::chdir::SCALAR)
   perl-File-chdir = 0.06-1.fc6
  =
   perl >= 0:5.004
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(Cwd)
   perl(Exporter)
   perl(File::Spec)
   perl(strict)
   perl(vars)
* 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:
   All tests successful.
   Files=3, Tests=48,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.08 cusr +  0.04 csys =  0.12 CPU)
* 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.