[Bug 508691] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Dispatch - Dispatch requests to CGI::Application based objects

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Jun 30 09:36:29 UTC 2009


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=508691





--- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade at gmail.com>  2009-06-30 05:36:28 EDT ---

Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i586).
koji Build =>http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1443364
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream url
39e0fb1f9209fb82d8f086ba9165fcc1b8a7ebcc  CGI-Application-Dispatch-2.16.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc is present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no scriptlets present.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ make test gave
All tests successful.
Files=2, Tests=28,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr  0.01 sys +  0.09 cusr  0.02
csys =  0.14 CPU)
+ Package perl-CGI-Application-Dispatch-2.16-1.fc12.noarch =>
Provides: perl(CGI::Application::Dispatch) = 2.16
perl(CGI::Application::Dispatch::Regexp) = 2.13
Requires: perl(Carp) perl(Exception::Class) perl(Exception::Class::TryCatch)
perl(base) perl(constant) perl(strict) perl(warnings)
+ Not a GUI application

APPROVED.

-- 
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