[Bug 579389] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser-XS - A fast, primitive HTTP request parser

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579389

Steve Traylen <steve.traylen at cern.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |steve.traylen at cern.ch
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |steve.traylen at cern.ch
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen at cern.ch> 2010-04-05 16:15:57 EDT ---
Review: perl-HTTP-Parser-XS
Date:    April 5th 2010
Mock Build: F14 x86_64 okay.

* PASS: rpmlint output
$ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/perl-HTTP-Parser-XS-* SPECS/perl-HTTP-Parser-XS.spec
SRPMS/perl-HTTP-Parser-XS-0.07-1.fc13.src.rpm 
perl-HTTP-Parser-XS-tests.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

* PASS: Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
yes perl
* PASS: spec file name same as  base package %{name}.
yes perl
* PASS: Packaging Guidelines.
* PASS: Approved license in .spec file.
perl
* PASS: License on Source code.
The README is clear but META.yml contains
license:             ~
maybe a note could be passed to upsteam.
* PASS: Include LICENSE file or similar if it exist.
* PASS: Written in American English.
* PASS: Spec file legible. 
* PASS: Included source must match upstream source.
$ md5sum HTTP-Parser-XS-0.07.tar.gz ../SOURCES/HTTP-Parser-XS-0.07.tar.gz 
890711d599f036fe613b3c8589000a10  HTTP-Parser-XS-0.07.tar.gz
890711d599f036fe613b3c8589000a10  ../SOURCES/HTTP-Parser-XS-0.07.tar.gz

* PASS: Build on one architecture.
mock build
* PASS: Not building on an architecture must highlighted.
mock build
* PASS: Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
mock build
* PASS: Handle locales properly. 
None present
* PASS: ldconfig must be called on shared libs.
None present.
* PASS: No bundled copies of system libraries.
None present.
* PASS: Package must state why relocatable if relocatable.
Not relocatable.
* PASS: A package must own all directories that it creates
Yes.
* PASS:  No duplicate files in %files listings. 
None
* PASS:  Permissions on files must be set properly. %defattr
* PASS:  %clean section contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
* PASS:  Each package must consistently use macros.
* PASS:  The package must contain code, or permissable content.
* PASS:  Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.  
None present.
* PASS:  %doc  must not affect the runtime of the application. 
* PASS:  Header files must be in a -devel package.
none present.
* PASS:  Static libraries must be in a -static package.
none present.
* PASS:  Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
none present.
* PASS:  devel packages must require the exact base package
* PASS:  No .la libtool archives
* PASS:  GUI apps should have %{name}.desktop file
None
* PASS:  No files or directories already owned by other packages. 
None
* PASS:  %install must run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
* PASS:  All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

Comments:
1) Presumably the "tests" subpackage could be noarch. Only makes
   sense to fix if it can be done in a generic way of course.
2) The license is clear in the README but the META.yml contains
   license:             ~
   maybe a note upstream asking them to fix would be good.

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.