[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||671352 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org --- Comment #8 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org 2010-12-01 07:53:12 EST --- This package includes a -tests subpackage, but the version built from the main perl package does not. This is likely to lead to situations like Bug #640752 in the future. I suggest either removing the -tests subpackage or adding a -CGI-tests subpackage to the main perl package for consistency. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 --- Comment #9 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2010-12-01 09:11:50 EST --- Thanks, but I don't like idea that we would have -test sub-package for everything in perl core. I'd rather obsoleted this CGI-tests. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 --- Comment #10 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org 2010-12-01 09:25:43 EST --- That's fine; just be consistent. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2010-12-01 09:36:10 --- Comment #11 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2010-12-01 09:36:10 EST --- Built without -test sub-package on all branches. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2010-11-30 04:01:54 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-CGI Short Description: Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses Owners: mmaslano psabata ppisar Branches: F-13 F-14 devel InitialCC: perl-sig (We need branches for all Fedoras, because we'd like to update CGI for security reason). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-30 10:19:15 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 --- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2010-11-29 08:00:36 EST --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2631849 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||657950 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125
--- Comment #2 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2010-11-29 08:46:15 EST ---
Created attachment 463486
-- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=463486
Spec file patch
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [1]
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x] Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[-] Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x] PreReq is not used.
[x] Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [2]
[-] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)).
[-] Package run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) and the beginning of
%install.
[x] Package use %makeinstall only when ``make install DESTDIR=...'' doesn't
work.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[x] Changelog in prescribed format.
[x] Rpmlint output is silent.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[-] 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.
[-] License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[3,4]
[x] Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package : 51d62c74b83e5b6a8b6f88b4e9334387
MD5SUM upstream package : 51d62c74b83e5b6a8b6f88b4e9334387
[-] Compiler flags are appropriate.
[-] %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Each %files section contains %defattr.
[x] No %config files under /usr.
[-] %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using
desktop-file-install file if it is a GUI application. [5]
[-] Package contains a valid .desktop file.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x] File names are valid UTF-8.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] Package contains no bundled libraries.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
[-] Package contains no static executables.
[-] 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).
[-] Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[-] Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x] Package does not genrate any conflict.
[x] Package does not contains kernel modules.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[-] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x] Package installs properly.
[x] Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [6]
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[?] Package functions as described.
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[?] If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] SourceX is a working URL.
[-] SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x] Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x] %check is present and all tests pass.
[-]
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 --- Comment #3 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2010-11-29 08:48:06 EST --- Question is: on cpan it is as CGI.pm. Should we package it as perl-CGI.pm? I would keep the perl-CGI name since it makes more sense. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 --- Comment #4 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2010-11-29 09:23:57 EST --- Updated SRPM: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-CGI-3.50-1.fc14.src.rpm -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658125] Review Request: perl-CGI - Handle Common Gateway Interface requests and responses
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=658125 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2010-11-29 09:38:20 EST --- Looks okay now. *** 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
