[Bug 693034] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Aliases - Easy aliasing of methods and attributes in Moose

[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=693034

Mario Blättermann <mariobl at freenet.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |mariobl at freenet.de
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |mariobl at freenet.de
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann <mariobl at freenet.de> 2011-04-02 18:03:57 EDT ---
$ rpmlint -v *
perl-MooseX-Aliases.noarch: I: checking
perl-MooseX-Aliases.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessors
-> accessory, accessorize, successors
perl-MooseX-Aliases.noarch: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/MooseX-Aliases/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-MooseX-Aliases.src: I: checking
perl-MooseX-Aliases.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessors ->
accessory, accessorize, successors
perl-MooseX-Aliases.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/MooseX-Aliases/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-MooseX-Aliases.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/D/DO/DOY/MooseX-Aliases-0.09.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
perl-MooseX-Aliases.spec: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/D/DO/DOY/MooseX-Aliases-0.09.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Fine, rpmlint is very silent. Two warnings from the spellchecker only.



---------------------------------
key:

[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
---------------------------------

[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
    GPL+ or Artistic
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
    $ md5sum *
    19739592f44861b5618c00deb0b2793f  MooseX-Aliases-0.09.tar.gz
    19739592f44861b5618c00deb0b2793f  MooseX-Aliases-0.09.tar.gz.packaged

[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
- Nothing to compile either, but it builds, of course. See Koji build above.

[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. 
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[+] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
    separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream...

[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
    See Koji build above (which uses mock anyway)
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
    I assume the packager has tested it...
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ...
[+] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.

--------------------------------------

PACKAGE 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.