Taking.

The rpm is for Array-Utils 0.3 but 0.4 and 0.5 both came out in May 2010.
Lubomir, can you update your package before we go any further?

I'd drop the second sentence of the %description:
"The module emerged because I was tired to include same utility routines in
numerous projects."

Maybe you could at the same time make the files listing more explicit and not use wildcards so wildly :)

(In reply to comment #2)
> The rpm is for Array-Utils 0.3 but 0.4 and 0.5 both came out in May 2010.
> Lubomir, can you update your package before we go any further?

Done.

(In reply to comment #3)
> I'd drop the second sentence of the %description:
> "The module emerged because I was tired to include same utility routines in
> numerous projects."

Good catch, fixed.

(In reply to comment #4)
> Maybe you could at the same time make the files listing more explicit and not
> use wildcards so wildly :)

Well, this is what cpanspec does. I think it's a good idea to rely as much as possible of RPM filelist management on lower-lever packaging mechanism if it's trustworthy enough. CPAN is.

SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/perl-Array-Utils.spec
SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/perl-Array-Utils-0.5-1.fc14.src.rpm

 - = 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=2650083

 [x] Rpmlint output: 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

 [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.
ac15e6dce2c7c9d1855ecab9eb00aee6  Array-Utils-0.5.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.
 [-] The spec file handles locales properly.
 [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
 [x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
 [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
 [x] Permissions on files are set properly.
 [x] Package consistently uses macros.
 [x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
 [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
 [x] 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.
 [x] 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: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
 [x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
     Tested on: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
 [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
 [?] Package functions as described.
 [-] 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
All tests successful.
Files=1, Tests=17,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr  0.00 sys +  0.02 cusr  0.00 csys =  0.03 CPU)
Result: PASS

APPROVED.

Lubomir, is there something blocking this bug?

No, sorry, I have lost track of this somehow. Thanks for the reminder.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: perl-Array-Utils
Short Description: Small utils for array manipulation
Owners: lkundrak
Branches: f14 el6

Git done (by process-git-requests).

Thanks. Imported and built.