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-OpenFrame
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192577
------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-05-26 00:21 EST -------
Only one of the files (lib/OpenFrame/Argument/Blob.pm) seems to have a statement
of the license. I don't think that's enough to suggest the license for the
entire package.
I wonder about the need for these:
Requires: perl(File::Type) >= 0.01
Requires: perl(HTTP::Request) >= 0.01
Requires: perl(IO::Null) >= 0.01
The versions are so low that they seem to have been put in as placeholders. RPM
should figure out all of these on its own. (It doesn't find HTTP::Request but
it does find other modules, all provided by perl-libwww-perl.)
Some issues from the test suite:
t/02http_request....[OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::dispatch]
no response available
at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Pipeline/Dispatch.pm line 74
ok
t/98compile.........skipped
all skipped: - do not have File::Find::Rule installed
I'm not sure if the first is a mock artifact or a problem with the test suite.
The second is fixed up with the obvious BR:.
Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
? license field matches the actual license.
? license is open source-compatible.
* source files match upstream:
6469544c6c83a0aa33676421cb09d1a5 OpenFrame-3.05.tar.gz
6469544c6c83a0aa33676421cb09d1a5 OpenFrame-3.05.tar.gz-srpm
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* rpmlint is silent.
? final provides and requires are sane:
perl(OpenFrame)
perl(OpenFrame::Argument::Blob)
perl(OpenFrame::Constants)
perl(OpenFrame::Cookie)
perl(OpenFrame::Cookies)
perl(OpenFrame::Object)
perl(OpenFrame::Request)
perl(OpenFrame::Response)
perl(OpenFrame::Segment::ContentLoader)
perl(OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Request)
perl(OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response)
perl-OpenFrame = 3.05-1.fc6
-
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
perl(CGI)
perl(CGI::Cookie)
perl(Exporter)
perl(File::Spec)
perl(File::Temp)
perl(File::Type)
perl(File::Type) >= 0.01
perl(FileHandle)
perl(HTTP::Headers)
perl(HTTP::Request) >= 0.01
perl(HTTP::Response)
perl(HTTP::Status)
perl(IO::Null)
perl(IO::Null) >= 0.01
perl(OpenFrame)
perl(OpenFrame::Argument::Blob)
perl(OpenFrame::Cookie)
perl(OpenFrame::Cookies)
perl(OpenFrame::Object)
perl(OpenFrame::Request)
perl(OpenFrame::Response)
perl(OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response)
perl(Pipeline)
perl(Pipeline) >= 2.00
perl(Pipeline::Production)
perl(Pipeline::Segment)
perl(base)
perl(constant)
perl(strict)
perl(warnings::register)
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* %check is present and all tests pass (after adding File::Find::Rule):
All tests successful.
Files=6, Tests=54, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.39 cusr + 0.16 csys = 0.55 CPU)
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.