Bug 189047

Summary: Review Request: perl-Term-UI
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Steven Pritchard <steve>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Jason Tibbitts <j>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhide   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-05-06 17:16:37 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On: 188505, 188523, 189044, 189046    
Bug Blocks: 163779, 189048    

Description Steven Pritchard 2006-04-15 00:15:39 UTC 
Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Term-UI/perl-Term-UI.spec
SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Term-UI-0.12-1.src.rpm
Description:
Term::UI is a transparent way of eliminating the overhead of having to
format a question and then validate the reply, informing the user if the
answer was not proper and re-issuing the question.
Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2006-04-15 17:13:17 UTC 
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and
conforms to the Perl template.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  It's not included separately in the
package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it.
* source files match upstream:
   b34442df078685f3e8b1197e1e98d1e6  Term-UI-0.12.tar.gz
   b34442df078685f3e8b1197e1e98d1e6  Term-UI-0.12.tar.gz-srpm
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane.
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directory 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.
* 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.

APPROVED
Comment 2 Steven Pritchard 2006-05-06 17:16:37 UTC 
Imported, branches created, builds requested.