Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: perl-Email-Valid - check validity of email addresses

------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-05-01 21:51 EST -------
I took another look at this and realized that it's probably best if the test
suite is disabled; it requires network access which is a bad idea since the
builder machines aren't even guaranteed to be on the Internet.  I'm going to
disable it in the spec and proceed with the review, but you should consider
patching out the tests that require the network instead so there's at least a
bit of test coverage.

You'll need BuildRequires: Mail::Address (makefile complains about it not being

Two of the files in the build package come out mode 444.  The Perl specfile
template contains a chmod line at the end of %install to fix these up.

I'll approve if you fix these two issues.

* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
X specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently. 
It's missing a bit from the suggested template which causes problems.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  It's not included separately in the
package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it.
* source files match upstream:
   371b1552b81b93ffbf89cf2b1c1376c5  Email-Valid-0.15.tar.gz
   371b1552b81b93ffbf89cf2b1c1376c5  Email-Valid-0.15.tar.gz-srpm
* latest version is being packaged.
X BuildRequires missing perl(Mail::Address).
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane.
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
X file permissions improper; some files are mode 444.
* %clean is present.
O %check is disabled; test suite requires network access.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.

Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Fedora-package-review mailing list

Reply via email to