Bug 189084

Summary:	Review Request: perl-Graphics-ColorNames
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Steven Pritchard <steve>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	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:	2006-05-07 21:01:15 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:	189081
Bug Blocks:	163779

Description Steven Pritchard 2006-04-15 19:26:16 UTC

Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Graphics-ColorNames/perl-Graphics-ColorNames.spec
SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Graphics-ColorNames-1.06-1.src.rpm
Description:
This module defines RGB values for common color names. The intention is to
(1) provide a common module that authors can use with other modules to
specify colors; and (2) free module authors from having to "re-invent the
wheel" whenever they decide to give the users the option of specifying a
color by name rather than RGB value.

Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2006-04-23 04:49:17 UTC

One duplicated dependency:

perl(Module::Load)
perl(Module::Load) >= 0.1

not a blocker.

* 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:
   0551cb0b17babcbdef284d5b502731a4  Graphics-ColorNames-1.06.tar.gz
   0551cb0b17babcbdef284d5b502731a4  Graphics-ColorNames-1.06.tar.gz-srpm
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (development, i386).
* rpmlint is silent.
O 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 2006-05-07 21:01:15 UTC

Imported into CVS, branches created, and builds requested.