Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 428492
Review Request: perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-Simple - Simple single-sheet Excel document creator
Last modified: 2008-01-14 13:14:06 EST
SRPM URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-Simple-1.04-1.fc8.src.rpm
SPEC URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-Simple.spec
This library provides a simple abstraction of the Spreadsheet::WriteExcel
module, for a kinder, gentler method of creating simple single-sheet Excel
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i386).
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream url
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc is present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no scriptlets present.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ make test outputs
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0,
'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t
All tests successful.
Files=3, Tests=16, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.62 cusr + 0.05 csys = 0.67 CPU)
+ Package perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-Simple-1.04-1.fc9 =>
Provides: perl(Spreadsheet::WriteExcel::Simple) = 1.04
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(IO::Scalar) >= 1.126
perl(Spreadsheet::WriteExcel) >= 0.31 perl(strict)
New Package CVS Request
Package Name: perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-Simple
Short Description: Simple single-sheet Excel document creator
Branches: F-7, F-8, devel
Can we use the name "Excel" here? It's a registered trademark I think...
I don't see why not -- it's part of the package name, and there's certainly
precedent for it (e.g. perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel, -ParseExcel). Just
referring to something using a trademarked name doesn't create infringement and
we are talking about Excel here, not using it as a generic equivalent to
..and it's a heck of a lot shorter than
Yeah, I guess this is "Nominative fair use" from what I can see, so should be
fine. Sorry for the sidetracking...
Imported and building... Thanks for the review! :)