Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498324 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |[email protected] AssignedTo|[email protected] |[email protected] Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <[email protected]> 2009-04-29 21:53:49 EDT --- Alright, here is the review. Nothing serious: ! Please make the description span 80 columns evenly (as much as possible) ! The file Changes can be packaged as %doc ! There is no information about the license except at the end of the lib/JSON/RPC/Common.pm file. Could you advise upstream for putting a COPYING file into the tarball and adding headers that contain license information to the source files? ! It looks like these BR's can be removed: BuildRequires: perl(Moose) BuildRequires: perl(namespace::clean) The package builds fine without them. The other packages pull them in so they don't cause any harm. I'll leave this up to you. * Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. I don't think this package should own %{perl_vendorlib}/JSON/ . It should own %{perl_vendorlib}/JSON/RPC instead. Ownership of %{perl_vendorlib}/JSON/ will be satisfied by rpm's automatic dependency generation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
