[Bug 244948] Review Request: perl-Config-Std - Yet Another Way of Storing Configuration Files

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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-Config-Std - Yet Another Way of Storing Configuration Files


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=244948





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-09-25 01:23 EST -------
The most recent version still doesn't have a build dependency on Test::More, so
all the tests fail and the package fails to build.

Also, this package has the same issue with the license that
perl-Business-CreditCard has.  According to the documentation, License: should
be "GPL+ or Artistic".

Adding the necessary build dependency gets things building, although for
complete test suite coverage you should also have build dependencies on
perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) and perl(Test::Pod).  I added the necessary bits so
that I could do this review.

rpmlint complains about the License: tag, and also
 perl-Config-Std.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.0.4-3 v0.0.4-3.fc8
Indeed, this package has ended up with a stray 'v' in the Version which comes
from upstream.  Frankly I've no idea why upstream would do a thing like that,
but we want the Version: tag to be numeric in this case.  So you'll need to
remove the 'v' from Version: and, so that things still build, add that 'v' back
to your Source0: and %setup lines.

I know %description comes from the package itself (specifically the Description
section of the documentation) but I would urge you to remove the needless
semi-profanity.  (Not that it offends me, but we're creating a distribution to
be used by very many people.)


* source files match upstream:
   40b455d1971960514a0b87c58a4d1656207e03cd6d7a33dd3c068f97ad3ed5d5  
   Config-Std-v0.0.4.tar.gz
X package version is not compliant with guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
? description is questionable.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
X license field is incorrect.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
X BuildRequires are proper (missing perl(Test::More)).
* %clean is present.
X package fails to build.
* once made to build, the package installs properly
X rpmlint has valid complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   perl(Config::Std)
   perl(Config::Std::Block)
   perl(Config::Std::Comment)
   perl(Config::Std::Gap)
   perl(Config::Std::Hash)
   perl(Config::Std::Keyval)
   perl-Config-Std = v0.0.4-3.fc8
  =
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(Carp)
   perl(Class::Std)
   perl(Fcntl)
   perl(version)

* %check is present and once necessary build dependencies are added, all tests 
  pass:
   All tests successful.
   Files=11, Tests=31,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.50 cusr +  0.20 csys =  0.70 CPU)
* 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.

-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.