[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora Version|devel |rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-26 17:15 EST --- 11624 (perl-Net-LibIDN): Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. 11623 (perl-Net-LibIDN): Build on target fedora-5-extras succeeded. 11622 (perl-Net-LibIDN): Build on target fedora-4-extras succeeded. as per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors I'll close this bug report with NEXTRELEASE now. -- 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-23 11:23 EST --- Builds fine in mock (x86_64, development) and rpmlint is silent. Note that BuildRequires: perl is not necessary; it's already in the buildroot by default. One odd thing about this package is that the documentation indicates that a copy of the GPL should be in a Copying file, but one isn't included in the tarball. (Who can understand why upstream does the things they do?) To avoid confusion, you might want to run perldoc -t perlgpl Copying at the end of %build and then include the Copying file in %doc. Your libidn = 0.4.0 dependency is also redundant; rpm finds the libidn.so.11 dependency which will pull in libidn. A search does show that libidn.so.11 was present at least back to libidn 0.3.7, but even FC3 shipped with 0.5.6 so there's no chance of having an old version. None of these are blockers. The first is a matter of taste and the latter two would be good to fix but I'll leave it up to you. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * source files match upstream: 0738e29652f5d9f11694b289229e79f8 Net-LibIDN-0.08.tar.gz * latest version is being packaged. O BuildRequires are proper (BR: perl is redundant) * package builds in mock (x86_64, development). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: LibIDN.so()(64bit) perl(Net::LibIDN) = 0.08 perl-Net-LibIDN = 0.08-5.fc6 = libidn = 0.4.0 libidn.so.11()(64bit) perl = 0:5.006 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(AutoLoader) perl(Carp) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Errno) perl(Exporter) perl(strict) perl(warnings) * shared libraries are present, but internal to perl. * 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: ok 21 + exit 0 * 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-17 08:41 EST --- For those reading allong I've sponsored Robert after reviewing - approving 2 of his other packages. Removing the NEEDSPONSOR blocker. -- 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-14 02:42 EST --- Restoring some comments lost due to the BZ crash: I suggested to Robert that we would work together to get 3 of his submission into the approved state and that I would then sponsor him, he responded with: --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-11 12:44 EST --- Yes, that sounds well. BTW, I've got updated all four packages on June, 9th to have a better rpmlint output. And as I'm new to the Fedora Extras stuff, just contact me, if there's something... -- 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-11 07:45 EST --- Ah I see, so it seems (from the large amount of Review Requests) that you're seriously interested in becoming an FE contributer. I'm able to sponsor people and as said I believe that you're seriously interested (good!) So I would like to sponsor you once I get to know you a little better. For this I would like to suggest that we work together to get 3 of your packages approved and once 3 have passed review I'll sponsor you. Does this sound like a plan? Notice that I've already started by reviewing php-magickwand. -- 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-08 05:31 EST --- Hi, In order to get sponsored you must first understand that things are currently organised in FE in such a way that once you are sponsored you get full CVS access to all packages. Thus having one good package ready for review usually isn't enough to get you sponsored. There are 2 ways to proceed from here for us (the FE community) to get to learn you better: 1) You review a couple of packages from others see FE-NEW for a list of Review Requests that need a Reviewer, don't worry about not being competent enough todo a review, just add me to the CC-list and I'll watch over your back. 2) Create some more packages and link to them from the BZ ticket. Or (probably the best) a combination of these 2. What also helps is activity in other Fedora projects such as translations etc. Also it is a good idea to read the howto become a contributer packaging guidelines and review guidlines wiki pages thoroughly first, if you had done that you could have known that you had to make this bug blok FE_NEEDSPONSOR yourself. -- 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-08 09:55 EST --- More packages are in bug #194470, #194479 and #194481. I think more will follow, when I've got time for this. And sorry, yes I forgot to block FE_NEEDSPONSOR for this bug report. -- 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
[Bug 193960] Review Request: perl-Net-LibIDN
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-Net-LibIDN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-03 12:01 EST --- Packager needs a sponsor. -- 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
