Bug 673099 - Review Request: perl-Perl-Critic-Lax - Policies that let you slide on common exceptions
Summary: Review Request: perl-Perl-Critic-Lax - Policies that let you slide on common ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Petr Šabata
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 690569
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-01-27 12:46 UTC by Petr Pisar
Modified: 2011-03-28 16:21 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: perl-Perl-Critic-Lax-0.008-1.fc16
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-03-28 16:21:36 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
psabata: fedora-review+
j: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Petr Pisar 2011-01-27 12:46:54 UTC
Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Perl-Critic-Lax/perl-Perl-Critic-Lax.spec
SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Perl-Critic-Lax/perl-Perl-Critic-Lax-0.008-1.fc15.src.rpm
Description:
The Perl-Critic-Lax distribution includes versions of core Perl::Critic
modules with built-in exceptions. If you really like a Perl::Critic policy,
but find that you often violate it in a specific way that seems pretty darn
reasonable, maybe there's a Lax policy. If there isn't, send one in!

Comment 1 Petr Šabata 2011-03-28 15:34:17 UTC
Package: perl-Perl-Critic-Lax
Version: 0.008
Release: 1.fc15
Sources: Perl-Critic-Lax-0.008.tar.gz
Patches: 
----------
Package failed to build locally!
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-rawhide-x86_64.
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-rawhide-i386.

MUST items:
[  OK  ] Package does NOT include pre-built binaries or libraries
[  OK  ] Spec file is legible and written in American english
[  OK  ] Package successfully builds on at least one supported primary architecture
[  --  ] All ExcludeArch tags valid, referencing proper bug reports
[  OK  ] Package obeys FHS (with _libexecdir and /srv exceptions)
[  OK  ] No errors reported by rpmlint
[  OK  ] Changelog present and properly formatted
[  OK  ] Package does NOT include Packager, Vendor, Copyright or PreReq tags
[  OK  ] Source tags are working URLs or justified otherwise
[  OK  ] Requires correct or justified otherwise
[  OK  ] BuildRequires correct or justified otherwise
[  OK  ] All file names are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[  OK  ] All plain text failes are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[  --  ] Large documentation files are located in doc subpackage
[  OK  ] All documentation prefixed with %doc
[  OK  ] Documentation is NOT executable
[  OK  ] No files in %doc are needed at run-time
[  --  ] Compiler flags honor Fedora defaults or are justified
[  --  ] Package generates useful debuginfo packages
[  --  ] Header files are placed in devel subpackage
[  --  ] Unversioned shared libraries are placed in devel subpackage
[  --  ] Pkgconfig files are placed in devel subpackage
[  --  ] Full-versioned Requires of the base package in subpackages
[  --  ] Package calls ldconfig in post and postun sections for all subpackages, if applicable
[  --  ] Static libraries are provided by static subpackage
[  OK  ] Package contains no static executables unless approved by FESCo
[  OK  ] Package does NOT bundle any system libraries
[  --  ] RPath not used for anything besides internal libraries
[  --  ] All config files are marked noreplace or justified otherwise
[  OK  ] No config files are located under /usr
[  --  ] Package contains a SystemV-compatible initscript
[  --  ] A GUI application installs a proper desktop file
[  --  ] All desktop files are installed by desktop-file-install or justified otherwise
[  OK  ] Package consistently uses macros
[  --  ] makeinstall macro is used only if make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} does NOT work
[  --  ] Macros in Summary and description are expandable at build-time
[  --  ] globals used in place of defines
[  --  ] Locales handled correctly -- package requires gettext and uses find_lang, if applicable
[  --  ] Scriptlets are sane
[  OK  ] Package is not relocatable unless justified
[  OK  ] Package contains only acceptable code or content
[  OK  ] Package owns all the files and directories it creates, installs and/or uses unless those are already owned by another package
[  OK  ] files sections do NOT contain duplicate files except for licenses
[  OK  ] All files sections use defattr or justify otherwise
[  OK  ] Package does NOT cause any conflicts
[  OK  ] Package does NOT contain kernel modules
[  OK  ] Package does NOT bundle fonts or other general purpose data
[  OK  ] Final Requires and Provides are sane

SHOULD items:
[  OK  ] The Summary does NOT end with a period
[  OK  ] Package does NOT include BuildRoot tag, clean section or buildroot removal in install section
[  OK  ] Package should preserve files timestamps
[  OK  ] Package does NOT explicitly BuildRequire bash, bzip2, coreutils, cpio, diffutils, fedora-release, findutils, gawk, gcc, gcc-c++, grep, gzip, info, make, patch, redhat-rpm-config, rpm-build, sed, shadow-utils, tar, unzip, util-linux-ng, which or xz
[  OK  ] Description does NOT consist of lines longer than 80 characters
[  OK  ] Package uses parallel make
[  --  ] In case of a web application, package installs date into /usr/share instead of /var/www
[  --  ] All patches have a comment or an upstream bug link
[  --  ] Package installs manpages for all executables
[  OK  ] Package contains check section and all tests pass
[  ??  ] Package works as expected

NOTES:
------
Failed local build on Fedora 14 during test phase since PPI::Document wasn't available. However, this isn't explicitly required by the package anywhere and seems more like a test issue. 
Package seems fine for Fedora, approving.

Comment 2 Petr Pisar 2011-03-28 15:46:09 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: perl-Perl-Critic-Lax
Short Description: Policies that let you slide on common exceptions
Owners: ppisar, mmaslano, psabata
Branches: 
InitialCC: perl-sig

Comment 3 Jason Tibbitts 2011-03-28 16:08:52 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 4 Petr Pisar 2011-03-28 16:21:36 UTC
Thank you for the review and the repository.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.