[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-04 11:14 EST --- Imported and building. Thanks for the review! -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-01 11:06 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-CGI-Prototype Short Description: Create a CGI application by subclassing Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-5, FC-6, devel InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by
subclassing
Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-01 01:55 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[x] Rpmlint output: None
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[-] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: 0d09d6fcf9616789ca2efbefbc7ed401
MD5SUM upstream package: 0d09d6fcf9616789ca2efbefbc7ed401
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR:
Arches excluded:
Why:
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[-] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== Issues ===
1.
=== Final Notes ===
1.
*** APPROVED ***
--
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.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-30 23:08 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Well, technically nothing in %doc is needed :) > > All right, let's not be too pedantic :) Who, me? O:-) > So what I read is "this test suite serves as a good addition to the > documentation" - which is good enough for me. I just haven't seen anyone else > packaging the test scripts, except as separate packages like mysql-test. Yah. I think we just never really saw it as anything more than a part of the build process before. > > Even beyond that, it's certainly possible that someone will want to test ths > > package as installed -- having the test suite around enables such activity. > > Well, in theory, if it passed in the buildsystem, it should be good, but That's another thing, too. If a package's test suite requires network access, we have to disable it by default, as it'd bomb out in mock. WWW::Myspace or most of the POE::Component::* modules are good examples of this: good, solid test suites I have to disable large parts of by default. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-30 23:03 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) > Well, technically nothing in %doc is needed :) All right, let's not be too pedantic :) > I've been realizing more and more lately that test suites can also make good > documentation, so I've started including them verbatim in %doc. Some of them > -- > like Moose -- even go so far as to say "the best documentation for [this > feature] is still in the test suite." So what I read is "this test suite serves as a good addition to the documentation" - which is good enough for me. I just haven't seen anyone else packaging the test scripts, except as separate packages like mysql-test. > Even beyond that, it's certainly possible that someone will want to test ths > package as installed -- having the test suite around enables such activity. Well, in theory, if it passed in the buildsystem, it should be good, but -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-30 22:48 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > > - disable autoprov -- with this small of a package it's easier than > > filtering > > Well, maybe. But I'd argue that filtering is more reliable. If you update > the > package at a later time and don't notice new functionality that would have a > provide, the filtering will automatically pick it up. Your method won't. No problem; switched to a filtering approach. > > - include full test suite in %%doc > > What's the rationale here? Is this needed? Well, technically nothing in %doc is needed :) I've been realizing more and more lately that test suites can also make good documentation, so I've started including them verbatim in %doc. Some of them -- like Moose -- even go so far as to say "the best documentation for [this feature] is still in the test suite." Even beyond that, it's certainly possible that someone will want to test ths package as installed -- having the test suite around enables such activity. SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-CGI-Prototype-0.9053-3.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-CGI-Prototype.spec -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-30 19:07 EST --- > - disable autoprov -- with this small of a package it's easier than filtering Well, maybe. But I'd argue that filtering is more reliable. If you update the package at a later time and don't notice new functionality that would have a provide, the filtering will automatically pick it up. Your method won't. > - include full test suite in %%doc What's the rationale here? Is this needed? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-30 18:35 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > Are your intentions to submit this package? Not at the moment. Even if it were in, I'd be unable to list it as a BR for this package without creating a circular dependency, as it requires this package to function. > Also, I noticed this: > Provides: perl(CGI::Prototype) = 0.9053 perl(CGI::Prototype::Hidden) > perl(My::App) perl(My::App::thanks) perl(My::App::welcome) > > I haven't checked to see what perl(MY::App), perl(My::App::thanks), and > perl(My::App:welcome) are yet, but they seem a bit dubious. Although probably > harmless as a Provide, you might want to make sure that's right. Good catch -- for whatever reason it looks like the autoprov script was picking that up. SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-CGI-Prototype-0.9053-2.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-CGI-Prototype.spec -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-30 18:03 EST --- > # note the "skipped: CGI::Prototype::Mecha not found" is expected; this module > # is a runtime requirement of that module, resulting in a > # plugin-before-the-base-module sorta deal. Are your intentions to submit this package? Also, I noticed this: Provides: perl(CGI::Prototype) = 0.9053 perl(CGI::Prototype::Hidden) perl(My::App) perl(My::App::thanks) perl(My::App::welcome) I haven't checked to see what perl(MY::App), perl(My::App::thanks), and perl(My::App:welcome) are yet, but they seem a bit dubious. Although probably harmless as a Provide, you might want to make sure that's right. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium Bug 235790 depends on bug 235780, which changed state. Bug 235780 Summary: Review Request: perl-Class-Prototyped - Fast prototype-based OO programming in Perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235780 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|NEW |CLOSED -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||perl-CGI-Prototype -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
