Bug 742559 (perl-CatalystX-REPL) - Review Request: perl-CatalystX-REPL - Read-eval-print-loop for debugging your Catalyst application
Summary: Review Request: perl-CatalystX-REPL - Read-eval-print-loop for debugging your...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: perl-CatalystX-REPL
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mario Blättermann
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CatalystX...
Whiteboard:
Depends On: perl-Carp-REPL
Blocks: 742671
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-09-30 14:37 UTC by Iain Arnell
Modified: 2011-11-06 23:56 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc16
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-11-06 23:54:38 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
mario.blaettermann: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Iain Arnell 2011-09-30 14:37:28 UTC
Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-CatalystX-REPL.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-1.fc17.src.rpm

Description:
Using Carp::REPL with a Catalyst application is hard. That's because of all
the internal exceptions that are being thrown and caught by Catalyst during
application startup. You'd have to manually skip over all of those.

This role works around that by automatically setting up Carp::REPL after
starting your application, if the CATALYST_REPL or MYAPP_REPL environment
variables are set.

*rt-0.10_01

Comment 1 Iain Arnell 2011-10-13 16:37:07 UTC
As with perl-Carp-REPL, Test::Expect is failing in koji, but fine locally under mock.


Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-CatalystX-REPL.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc17.src.rpm

Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3428803

Comment 2 Mario Blättermann 2011-10-13 18:36:57 UTC
$ rpmlint -i -v *perl-CatalystX-REPL.noarch: I: checking
perl-CatalystX-REPL.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) eval -> veal, vela, val
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

perl-CatalystX-REPL.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US startup -> start up, start-up, upstart
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

perl-CatalystX-REPL.noarch: I: checking-url http://search.cpan.org/dist/CatalystX-REPL/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-REPL.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04/LICENSE
The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or
misspelled.  Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file,
possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF.

perl-CatalystX-REPL.src: I: checking
perl-CatalystX-REPL.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) eval -> veal, vela, val
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

perl-CatalystX-REPL.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US startup -> start up, start-up, upstart
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

perl-CatalystX-REPL.src: I: checking-url http://search.cpan.org/dist/CatalystX-REPL/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-REPL.src: I: checking-url http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/F/FL/FLORA/CatalystX-REPL-0.04.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-REPL.spec: I: checking-url http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/F/FL/FLORA/CatalystX-REPL-0.04.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.


A "spelling error" as usual... No problem. The incorrect FSF address is worth to file a bug upstream.


OK, here we go:

---------------------------------
key:

[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
---------------------------------

[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
    GPL+ or Artistic
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
    $ md5sum *
    d1430f331366a491888b323f92413150  CatalystX-REPL-0.04.tar.gz
    d1430f331366a491888b323f92413150  CatalystX-REPL-0.04.tar.gz.packaged

[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
    - Succesful Koji build available.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[.] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
    separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream...
[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
    See Koji build above (which uses mock anyway)
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
    I assume the packager has tested it. Don't know how to test it on my
system.
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ...
[+] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.


----------------

PACKAGE APPROVED

----------------

Comment 3 Iain Arnell 2011-10-13 20:30:38 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: perl-CatalystX-REPL
Short Description: Read-eval-print-loop for debugging your Catalyst application
Owners: iarnell
Branches: f15 f16
InitialCC: perl-sig

Comment 4 Iain Arnell 2011-10-14 02:57:42 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> 
> A "spelling error" as usual... No problem. The incorrect FSF address is worth
> to file a bug upstream.

Thanks, yet again. Upstream is using Dist-Zilla, so should automatically pick up the updated license with the next release.

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-14 12:18:19 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2011-10-27 02:58:36 UTC
perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc16

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2011-10-27 02:58:44 UTC
perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc15

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2011-10-28 21:33:02 UTC
perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2011-11-06 23:54:38 UTC
perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2011-11-06 23:56:29 UTC
perl-CatalystX-REPL-0.04-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.


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