Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at

Bug 167511

Summary: Review Request: perl-Apache-Session
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Steven Pritchard <steve>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: fedora-extras-list, tcallawa
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-09-13 22:58:31 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 163779, 167755    

Description Steven Pritchard 2005-09-03 20:36:52 UTC
Spec Name or Url:
SRPM Name or Url:
These modules provide persistent storage for arbitrary data, in arbitrary
backing stores.  The details of interacting with the backing store are
abstracted to make all backing stores behave alike.  The programmer simply
interacts with a tied hash.

Comment 1 Tom "spot" Callaway 2005-09-07 23:35:10 UTC
You beat me to this one by four days. ;)


- rpmlint checks return nothing
- meets naming, packaging guidelines
- spec in am. english, legible
- source matches upstream
- compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing, unnecessary BR
- no libs, locales, docs, or need for -devel
- not relocatable
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code not content
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop


- License is GPL or Artistic, not just Artistic.

- I don't see any reason to conditionalize %check. Just go ahead and run it (and
always use the BR)

- You probably want to use %{perl_vendorlib}/Apache/ instead of
%{perl_vendorlib}/* in %files, otherwise, you won't own the directories that are

Post a fixed spec file and I'll approve this package.

Comment 2 Tom "spot" Callaway 2005-09-07 23:37:52 UTC
*** Bug 167753 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Steven Pritchard 2005-09-08 18:43:40 UTC
Oddly, almost every .pm says "Distribute under the Artistic License" while
README says "Distribute under the same terms as Perl itself".  I saw the line in first.

So do we call it GPL/Artistic or just Artistic?

Comment 4 Tom "spot" Callaway 2005-09-08 19:06:42 UTC
Go with what the source says. Might not be a bad idea to point out the
discontinuity to upstream, but don't let it hold you back on this package.

Comment 5 Steven Pritchard 2005-09-12 23:44:59 UTC
(Sorry for the delay.  Apparently I forgot to submit this.)

Spec URL:

Comment 6 Tom "spot" Callaway 2005-09-13 14:17:17 UTC