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-CSS-Tiny - Read/Write .css files with as little code as possible https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191619 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-15 11:22 EST ------- Everything looks good; the only thing I question is the reason for including test.css as %doc. It seems a bit pointless to me, but I guess it doesn't hurt anything. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text is included in the package. * source files match upstream: 66fac70597a4e6628f1875037d1d2a94 CSS-Tiny-1.11.tar.gz 66fac70597a4e6628f1875037d1d2a94 CSS-Tiny-1.11.tar.gz-srpm * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * 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. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=4, Tests=47, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.14 cusr + 0.06 csys = 0.20 CPU) * no scriptlets present. * 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. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
