[Bug 483453] New: Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method  - Method declaration with type checking

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483453

Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method  - Method
                    declaration with type checking
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
    Classification: Fedora

Spec URL:
http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-MooseX-Method/perl-MooseX-Met...

SRPM URL:
http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-MooseX-Method/perl-MooseX-Met...

Description: Method declaration with type checking.

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

manuel wolfshant  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|[e-mail]    |[e-mail]
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant   2009-02-01 19:49:06 EDT ---
Package Review
==============

Key:
 - = N/A
 x = Check
 ! = Problem
 ? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
 [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
 [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
 [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
 [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
     Tested on: devel/x86_64
 [x] Rpmlint output:
source RPM: empty
binary RPM:empty
 [x] Package is not relocatable.
 [x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
 [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     License type: GPL+ or Artistic (same as perl)
 [x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
 [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
 [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
     SHA1SUM of package: 70d0f0151c5b9d42019d5eff88d0c4d3738babc6
MooseX-Method-0.43.tar.gz
 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
 [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [-] The spec file handles locales properly.
 [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
 [x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
 [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
 [x] Permissions on files are set properly.
 [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
 [x] Package consistently uses macros.
 [x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
 [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
 [x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
 [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
 [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
 [x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
 [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
 [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.

=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
 [x] Latest version is packaged.
 [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
 [-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
 [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
     Tested on: devel/x86_64 & koji scratch build
 [-] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
     Tested on: standard perl module, noarch
 [?] Package functions as described.
 [-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
 [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
 [-] File based requires are sane.
 [x] make check passes

================
*** APPROVED ***
================

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

manuel wolfshant  changed:

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

--- Comment #2 from manuel wolfshant   2009-02-01 19:58:07 EDT ---
Sorry, I take it back for a second. I think that there are some Requires which
need to be filtered out, at least:
 perl(Test::Exception)
 perl(Test::Moose)
 perl(Test::More)
Also, some provides seem odd, and especially
 perl(Foo1)
 perl(Foo2)
 perl(Foo3)

Am I wrong?

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

Parag AN(पराग)  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-02-02 00:31:08 EDT ---
I think those Requires is ok as I see its been used by 
MooseX-Method-0.43/lib/MooseX/Test/Parameter/Moose.pm

Yes. For me also following provides looks to be removed.
Provides: perl(Foo1) perl(Foo2) perl(Foo3) perl(Foo::Parameter) perl(Foo::Role)

Please don't take my words as Final. Either Chris or Ralf can confirm this.

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #4 from Ralf Corsepius   2009-02-02 01:01:51 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I think those Requires is ok as I see its been used by 
> MooseX-Method-0.43/lib/MooseX/Test/Parameter/Moose.pm

Agreed. These perl(Test::*)'s seem to be in use.
> Yes. For me also following provides looks to be removed.
> Provides: perl(Foo1) perl(Foo2) perl(Foo3) perl(Foo::Parameter) perl(Foo::Role)

Also agreed. These seem bogus to me.

Please filter them out.

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

--- Comment #5 from Allisson Azevedo   2009-02-02 05:20:45 EDT ---
Ok, i'll fix.

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

--- Comment #6 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-03-14 09:43:52 EDT ---
any progress here?

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

--- Comment #7 from Allisson Azevedo   2009-03-18 18:27:50 EDT ---
Hi,

I'll submit a new package soon as possible.

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

Chris Weyl  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
               Flag|                            |needinfo?([e-mail]
                   |                            |m)

--- Comment #8 from Chris Weyl   2009-05-04 15:09:57 EDT ---
Flagging as needinfo/REPORTER, so it's clear to me where we're at from the
buglist.  No pressure :)

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

Chris Weyl  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Alias|                            |perl-MooseX-Method

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

--- Comment #9 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-05-13 02:33:29 EDT ---
any progress here?

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

--- Comment #10 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-06-03 06:22:09 EDT ---
ping?

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

--- Comment #11 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-06-24 04:19:55 EDT ---
ping?
Will close this as NOTABUG if reporter will not reply within a week.

[Bug 483453] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Method - Method declaration with type checking

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=483453

Allisson Azevedo  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |NOTABUG
               Flag|needinfo?([e-mail] |
                   |m)                          |

--- Comment #12 from Allisson Azevedo   2009-10-05 09:10:13 EDT ---
I dropped this request.