Bug 205885
Summary: | Review Request: perl-CGI-Untaint-email - Validate an email address | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | 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: | 2006-09-21 17:39:55 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: | 205884 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Tom "spot" Callaway
2006-09-09 15:46:23 UTC
The only issue I see is that you have two manual Requires: that duplicate unversioned requires that rpmbuild figures out on its own: perl(Email::Valid) perl(Email::Valid) >= 0.13 perl(Mail::Address) perl(Mail::Address) >= 1.40 There's probably no point in the versioned Email::Valid require because it was just added to the repo and so there's no older version that might be installed. I don't know about perl(Mail::Address); it looks like the 1.58 came out in 2003, so I think we're pretty much covered there as well. I'd say just go ahead and remove the manual Requires: for those packages and check in. Or, if you really want, filter those two unversioned automatic dependencies and check in. It's up to you. Review: * source files match upstream: 78bb576e038ece67d183d8c3b3ad2165 CGI-Untaint-email-0.03.tar.gz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * 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 (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * rpmlint is silent. X final provides and requires are sane: perl(CGI::Untaint::email) = 0.03 perl(Mail::Address::overload) perl-CGI-Untaint-email = 0.03-1.fc6 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(CGI::Untaint) >= 0.07 X perl(Email::Valid) perl(Email::Valid) >= 0.13 X perl(Mail::Address) perl(Mail::Address) >= 1.40 perl(base) perl(strict) perl(vars) * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=4, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.06 cusr + 0.01 csys = 0.07 CPU) * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. APPROVED, assuming you agree with me about the manual Requires: bits. Built. |