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=522732
Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |tibbs(a)math.uh.edu
Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> 2009-09-23 00:18:35 EDT ---
Builds fine and rpmlint is silent.
Note that a test is skipped because of a missing build dependency
(Pod::Coverage). POD coverage is generally a maintainer check anyway, so I
don't think it's a big deal, but you run the POD checks so I figured you might
want to run the coverage checks too.
* source files match upstream. sha256sum:
3d69fa8eb97405a6bd398d0d9305a0aaa0f83cfa176a8660ab58674282cc0266
Text-Diff-Parser-0.1001.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 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(Text::Diff::Parser) = 0.1001
perl(Text::Diff::Parser::Change)
perl-Text-Diff-Parser = 0.1001-1.fc12
=
perl >= 0:5.00404
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
perl(Carp)
perl(IO::File)
perl(strict)
perl(vars)
perl(warnings)
* %check is present and all tests pass:
All tests successful.
Files=7, Tests=58, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.05 usr 0.02 sys + 0.36 cusr 0.06
csys = 0.49 CPU)
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
APPROVED
The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.
--
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.