[Bug 475775] Review Request: perl-AnyEvent-BDB - Truly asynchronous berkeley db access

[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=475775


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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2008-12-10 17:43:44 EDT ---
You might want to capitalize "Berkeley DB" in your Summary: and %description. 
That's really the only thing I can see to complain about.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
  d2728acb0e75624100ba41fe0a0464ef92a2c90469599fec14332f3a17e59179  
   AnyEvent-BDB-1.0.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK (perhaps capitalize Berkeley DB).
* description is OK (capitalization).
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   perl(AnyEvent::BDB) = 1.0
   perl-AnyEvent-BDB = 1.0-1.fc11
  =
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
   perl(AnyEvent)
   perl(BDB)
   perl(base)
   perl(strict)

* %check is present and all tests pass:
  All tests successful.
  Files=1, Tests=1,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.00 usr  0.00 sys +  0.00 cusr  0.01 
   csys =  0.01 CPU)
  (not much of a test suite, but...)

* 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

The package review process needs reviewers!  If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.

-- 
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.