Spec URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard.spec SRPM URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard-2.05_10-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Module for parsing and creating vCards (RFC 2426) address
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1939471
SRPM URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard-2.06-1.fc11.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1941707 $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/perl-Text-vCard-2.06-1.fc12.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/perl-Text-vCard.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $
Updating links: Spec URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard.spec SRPM URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc12.src.rpm
Taking.
(In reply to comment #3) > > Spec URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard.spec FYI, This gives me a 404 error. === KEY === - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated === REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1953530 [!] Rpmlint output: [manu@orient perl-Text-vCard]$ rpmlint perl-Text-vCard*fc13* perl-Text-vCard.spec perl-Text-vCard.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.07 ['2.07-1.fc13', '2.07-1'] 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Philip, please use version-release in your changelogs. Version alone is not sufficient to tell one rpm from another. Also, please avoid changelog entries like "Version bump to latest.". These don't age well. [x] Package is not relocatable. [x] Buildroot is correct %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: GPL+ or Artistic [-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. 0ddde5121be180cb19a54cadd2b38404 Text-vCard-2.07.tar.gz [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. Nitpick : The version numbers on the BuildRequires are superfluous and should probably be removed. [-] The spec file handles locales properly. [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x] Package must own all directories that it creates. [-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [-] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x] Permissions on files are set properly. [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. [x] Package consistently uses macros. [x] Package contains code, or permissable content. [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present. [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la). [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. === SUGGESTED ITEMS === [x] Latest version is packaged. [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1953531 [x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. Tested on: dist-f13 [!] Package functions as described. Description doesn't say what the package actually does. Please fix it! [-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct. [-] File based requires are sane. [x] %check is present and the tests pass Your Requires are also superfluous, being already picked up by rpmlib. Please remove them. FAIL.
*** Bug 557949 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #3) > > > > Spec URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard.spec > > FYI, This gives me a 404 error. Fixed. > === KEY === > - = N/A > x = Check > ! = Problem > ? = Not evaluated > > === REQUIRED ITEMS === > > Tested on: > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1953530 New link: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1953961 > [!] Rpmlint output: > [manu@orient perl-Text-vCard]$ rpmlint perl-Text-vCard*fc13* > perl-Text-vCard.spec > perl-Text-vCard.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.07 ['2.07-1.fc13', > '2.07-1'] > 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > > Philip, please use version-release in your changelogs. Version alone is > not sufficient to tell one rpm from another. Also, please avoid changelog > entries like "Version bump to latest.". These don't age well. Fixed. > [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that > are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. > > Nitpick : The version numbers on the BuildRequires are superfluous and > should probably be removed. I was told during a pre-review on #fedora-devel (by someone very active there) to use cpanspec and that in general, the output of cpanspec was golden and could be left as-is 99% of the time (especially for trivial packages like this one). This is what I've tried to do. Perhaps if cpanspec is generating superfluous output, that should be addressed instead. > === SUGGESTED ITEMS === > [!] Package functions as described. > > Description doesn't say what the package actually does. Please fix it! Changed to: Text::vCard - a package to edit and create vCards (RFC 2426) (note the text is pretty much taken as is from the synopsis of the package's perldoc... I will ask the upstream author to make this a little more comprehensive in subsequent releases.) > [x] %check is present and the tests pass > > Your Requires are also superfluous, being already picked up by rpmlib. > Please remove them. Again, these were generated by cpanspec and left as is (per guidance received). If the output of cpanspec is known to be broken, why hasn't that been addressed? > FAIL.
Forgot to add: I've bumped to fc12 in the interim, and that's what I'm now building most packages for (by default). Spec URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard.spec SRPM URL: http://philipp.fedorapeople.org/perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc12.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #5) > > > FYI, This gives me a 404 error. > > Fixed. Thanks! > > Nitpick : The version numbers on the BuildRequires are superfluous and > > should probably be removed. > > I was told during a pre-review on #fedora-devel (by someone very active there) > to use cpanspec and that in general, the output of cpanspec was golden and > could be left as-is 99% of the time (especially for trivial packages like this > one). > > This is what I've tried to do. > > Perhaps if cpanspec is generating superfluous output, that should be addressed > instead. The decision to version BuidRequires (and Requires) is somewhat context-specific and the decision to keep the version is something that cpanspec cannot take. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requires for details. > Changed to: > > Text::vCard - a package to edit and create vCards (RFC 2426) Descriptions should be in the form of complete sentences and should expand on the summary, not repeat it. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description: "The summary should be a short and concise description of the package. The description expands upon this."
Files updated. And new koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1954586
Good job! APPROVED.
Merci bien.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: perl-Text-vCard Short Description: modules to manipulate vCard electronic business cards Owners: philipp Branches: F-11 F-12 InitialCC: perl-sig
CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).
perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc12
perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc11
perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update perl-Text-vCard'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2010-1610
perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update perl-Text-vCard'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-1618
perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
perl-Text-vCard-2.07-1.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.