Bug 714457

Taking.

[x] package passes
[-] not applicable
[!] package fails

== MUST ==

[x] rpmlint output
    $ rpmlint perl-Test-ConsistentVersion-0.2.3-1.fc14.src.rpm 
    perl-Test-ConsistentVersion.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) versioning -> version, versifying, versification
    perl-Test-ConsistentVersion.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US readme -> reamed, remade, read me
    perl-Test-ConsistentVersion.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changelog -> change log, change-log, changeling
    mock -r fedora-r1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
    $ rpmlint perl-Test-ConsistentVersion.spec 
    0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
    $ rpmlint perl-Test-ConsistentVersion-0.2.3-1.fc16.noarch.rpm 
    perl-Test-ConsistentVersion.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) versioning -> version, versifying, versification
    perl-Test-ConsistentVersion.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US readme -> reamed, remade, read me
    perl-Test-ConsistentVersion.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changelog -> change log, change-log, changeling
    1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.

    => Those warnings can be safely ignored

[x] The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[x] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[x] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[x] The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
[x] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
    => GPL+ or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file must be included in %doc
[x] The spec file must be written in American English
[x] The spec file for the package MUST be legible
[x] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL
    $ sha1sum Test-ConsistentVersion-v0.2.3.tar.gz 
    7b317131f5fbbecdd32d92ba6c7885fe0d58cbd2  Test-ConsistentVersion-v0.2.3.tar.gz

[x] The package '''MUST''' successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture
    => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3180123

[-] The spec file MUST handle locales properly
[-] Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files
(not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun
[x] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries
[-] If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review
[x] A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a
directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that
directory.
[x] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings
[x] Permissions on files must be set properly
[x] Each package must consistently use macros
[x] The package must contain code, or permissable content
[-] Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
[-] If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application
[-] Header files must be in a -devel package
[-] Static libraries must be in a -static package
[-] If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package
[-] Subpackages requiring the base package
[-] Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built
[-] Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,
and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section
[x] Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8

== SHOULD ==

[-] If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane
[-] Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using
a fully versioned dependency
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is
usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg
[-] If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
[?] Package functions as described.

== Notes ==

I guess the man page could be marked as %doc, but I won't block the package for that.

APPROVED

Thanks, Mathieu.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: perl-Test-ConsistentVersion
Short Description: Ensures a CPAN distribution has consistent versioning
Owners: eseyman
Branches: f15
InitialCC: perl-sig

Git done (by process-git-requests).

perl-Test-ConsistentVersion-0.2.3-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-ConsistentVersion-0.2.3-1.fc15

perl-Test-ConsistentVersion-0.2.3-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository.

perl-Test-ConsistentVersion-0.2.3-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.