[Bug 664817] Review Request: perl-HTML-Selector-XPath - CSS Selector to XPath compiler

[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=664817

Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> 2011-02-01 10:02:10 EST ---
I think that guideline bears further scrutiny.  If the perl maintainers do
intend to unbundle all modules from the base perl package then it makes sense
as eventually most perl packages will have to change.  If not, then requiring
packagers to anticipate which modules may or may not be unbundled isn't really
productive.  Not to mention finding these things isn't necessarily easy
(because the package builds just fine currently) so checking them in the review
process isn't really possible.

Personally, I would change that guideline from "should" to "are encouraged to".

Anyway, it's just a suggestion, not a requirement.  Perfectly reasonable for
packagers and reviewers to disagree about those, but no reason to assume that a
different reviewer will not have a different opinion.  And my opinion is that
this package is just fine.

Ralf, would you please open a ticket so that FPC can discuss amending or
removing that bit from the guidelines?

Of course I'm sure you know that you can remove BuildRoot, %clean and the
cleaning of the build root in %install if you don't intend to target el5.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
  fd0735f32a49a357025b0cb16669be34906ab8d8e514cff94075d71daa3fa99d
   HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   perl(HTML::Selector::XPath) = 0.04
   perl-HTML-Selector-XPath = 0.04-1.fc15
  =
   perl >= 0:5.008_001
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)  
   perl(Carp)  
   perl(Exporter)  
   perl(strict)  

* %check is present and all tests pass:
  All tests successful.
  Files=4, Tests=36,  0 wallclock secs
   ( 0.02 usr  0.02 sys +  0.22 cusr  0.03 csys =  0.29 CPU)
  Result: PASS

* no bundled libraries.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the 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.