[Bug 429609] Review Request: perl-CGI-SpeedyCGI - Speed up perl scripts by running them persistently

[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-CGI-SpeedyCGI - Speed up perl scripts by running them persistently


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429609


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |182235
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-01-26 13:29 EST -------
I'll completely sidestep the issue of that patch.  However, a check of the
licensing reveals something that troubles me.  The following file starts with
the usual GPL license block and then says "/* Based on apache's mod_cgi.c */"
and goes on to quote what I think is the 1.0 Apache license:
http://search.cpan.org/src/HORROCKS/CGI-SpeedyCGI-2.22/src/mod_speedycgi.c

My understanding is that it is not remotely kosher to relicense ASL code (any
version) as GPLv2.  Maybe v3, but I'm no expert.  Blocking FE-Legal so someone
who understands this can take a look.  However, I've already done most of this
review so I'll go ahead and finish it up and if the legal folks say it's OK then
at least the work won't be wasted.

rpmlint says:
  mod_speedycgi.x86_64: W: no-documentation
which is OK.  However, becase this requires the end user to make modification to
the installed .conf file, could you add a README.Fedora file indicating what the
user needs to do to make things work?

* source files match upstream:
   9021a5c6d8ed205422f091209addf7d1be27222adbcbd17bc52fbc527bcc6f98  
   CGI-SpeedyCGI-2.22.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.
* build root is OK.
? license field matches the actual license.
? license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint has acceptable complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
  mod_speedycgi-2.22-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
   config(mod_speedycgi) = 2.22-1.fc9
   mod_speedycgi.so()(64bit)
   mod_speedycgi = 2.22-1.fc9
  =
   config(mod_speedycgi) = 2.22-1.fc9
   httpd >= 2.0.40
   httpd-mmn = 20051115
   perl-CGI-SpeedyCGI = 2.22-1.fc9

  perl-CGI-SpeedyCGI-2.22-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
   perl(CGI::SpeedyCGI) = 2.22
   perl-CGI-SpeedyCGI = 2.22-1.fc9
  =
   libperl.so()(64bit)
   libutil.so.1()(64bit)
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(strict)
   perl(vars)

* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  I have not attempted to test 
   this.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.