[Bug 201477] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Mail

[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-DateTime-Format-Mail


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201477





------- Additional Comments From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu  2006-08-06 12:46 EST -------
SRPM URL:
http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-DateTime-Format-Mail-0.30-2.fc5.src.rpm
SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-DateTime-Format-Mail.spec

(In reply to comment #1)
> A blocker:
> 
> - For t/pod99.t missing BuildRequires: perl(File::Find::Rule)

Addressed above.

> 4 remarks:
> - no need to 
>   mv LICENCE LICENSE
>   it is the spec file that must be american english

Agreed, but easier to find this way, I think (particularly in an automated fashion).

> - in the man page there is a reference to t/invalid and 
>   t/sample_dates, so it may be relevant to package t/ in
>   %doc

Point well taken; added to %doc

> - I have the habit to add a trailing / to directories in %files
>   for example notes could be notes/

Appears directory ownership is maintained properly with this in %doc; changed.

> - it may be relevant to contact the upstream about version
>   strings, and try to convince him to have version strings in ascii
>   ascending order (relevant for other DateTime modules)

I'll drop them a note.  The version being filtered here is pretty old, so it
might not even be relevant in most cases anymore.

> Otherwise
[...snip...]
> If you fix (or explain) the BuildRequires I'll approve

Updated above! :)


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.