[Bug 521851] Review Request: perl-Nagios-Plugin-Beanstalk - Nagios plugin to observe Beanstalkd queue server
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Sep 23 03:08:53 UTC 2009
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=521851
Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |tibbs at math.uh.edu
Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> 2009-09-22 23:08:51 EDT ---
Builds fine and rpmlint is silent. Everything else looks fine; really the only
thing I can suggest is that your %description should consist of sentences (at
least one). Not a sufficiently big deal to hold up this review, though.
* source files match upstream. sha256sum:
9df45969b9b4ca10779a6cdd72c18347060a90a61f12eecd8918c4609a2466a1 Nagios-
Plugin-Beanstalk-0.04.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
perl(Nagios::Plugin::Beanstalk) = 0.04
perl-Nagios-Plugin-Beanstalk = 0.04-1.fc12
=
/usr/bin/env
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
perl(Beanstalk::Client)
perl(Nagios::Plugin)
perl(Nagios::Plugin::Beanstalk)
perl(base)
perl(strict)
perl(warnings)
* %check is present and all tests pass:
All tests successful.
Files=1, Tests=1, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.01 sys + 0.07 cusr 0.00
csys = 0.10 CPU)
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
APPROVED
The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list