[Bug 469023] Review Request: perl-Class-Adapter - Perl implementation of the "Adapter" Design Pattern

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Nov 3 12:02:05 UTC 2008


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=469023


Matej Cepl <mcepl at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|skasal at redhat.com           |mcepl at redhat.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




--- Comment #2 from Matej Cepl <mcepl at redhat.com>  2008-11-03 07:02:04 EDT ---
+ GOOD: rpmlint is silent on both source and binary package.
+ GOOD: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
+ GOOD: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
  %{name}.spec.
+ GOOD: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines .
+ GOOD: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
+ GOOD: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
+ GOOD: LICENSE file is in %doc.
+ GOOD: The spec file is written in American English.
+ GOOD: The spec file for the package is legible.
+ GOOD: The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
39b4b06a30b770ae5a7ee42dccdf143e  Class-Adapter-1.05.tar.gz
+ GOOD: The package successfully compiles and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=915478
+ GOOD: noarch, so it compiles everywhere.
+ GOOD: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
+ GOOD: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
  No locale support.
+ GOOD: no libraries
+ GOOD: not relocatable
+ GOOD: A package owns all directories that it creates.
  Follows perl guidelines.
+ GOOD: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
+ GOOD: Permissions on files must be set properly.
+ GOOD: Each package have a %clean section.
+ GOOD: Each package consistently use macros.
+ GOOD: The package contains code, or permissable content.
+ GOOD: No large documentation files, so no a -doc subpackage.
+ GOOD: Files registered in %doc does not affect the runtime of the
application.
+ GOOD: No header files.
+ GOOD: No static libraries.
+ GOOD: No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
+ GOOD: The package does not contain library files with a suffix.
+ GOOD: No devel packages.
+ GOOD: No .la libtool archives.
+ GOOD: Packages does not contain GUI applications.
+ GOOD: Packages does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
+ GOOD: Runs rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %install
+ GOOD: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
+ SHOULD: Includes license text.

-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list