[Bug 190101] Review Request: php-pear-Log

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: php-pear-Log


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190101


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tibbs at math.uh.edu




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-05-10 22:37 EST -------
I'd like to see some movement on these php-pear package reviews, but we have a
distinct lack of packaging guidelines for PHP modules.

Here are a few issues I noticed:
"PEAR" in the summary isn't really descriptive; maybe something like "Abstracted
logging facility for PHP" would make more sense.

I guess RPM won't extract the php-pear(*) provides as it will for Perl, which is
too bad.  I wonder if it could be taught.

Use "BuildArch:" instead of "BuildArchitectures:"; it lines up better.

rpmlint disagrees with the overlong line in the description.

Could you explain the comment in %prep?

Perhaps rpmlint could be taught to do the sanity check so it doesn't have to
live in the spec.

Could you explain the comment in %postun?

I think you might need Requires(post): php-pear and Requires(postun): php-pear
(or is that php-pear(PEAR)?).

Unfortunately I can't do a proper test because the updated php-pear isn't in FC5
yet and rawhide is broken at the moment.

-- 
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.