[Bug 452601] Review Request: perl-Business-CreditCard - Validate/generate credit card checksums/names

[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-Business-CreditCard  - Validate/generate credit card checksums/names


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452601


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

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




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-06-24 14:46 EST -------
The copyright in the .pm file says the usual "Same as Perl", so the License: tag
should be "GPL+ or Artistic" as indicated in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing.  Yes, even though Artistic alone is not
acceptable for Fedora, people who get the software from us are still welcome to
use the software under those terms

Honestly, that's the only issue; you can just fix it when you check in.

* source files match upstream:
   1a052afd178419057dff025b8ea3ad003ab110bce270359d3af70ad18664e055  
   Business-CreditCard-0.30.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.
X 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(Business::CreditCard) = 0.30
   perl-Business-CreditCard = 0.30-1.fc10
  =
   perl >= 1:5
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
   perl(Exporter)
   perl(vars)

* %check is present and all tests pass.
* 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.

APPROVED; just fix up the License: tag when you check in.

-- 
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.