Issues:
Three buildrequires duplicate what RPM detects automatically.  In the changelog
I see that you deleted one duplicate Requires: statement; why that one and not
the three others.

Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and
conforms to the Perl template.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  It's not included separately in the
package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it.
* source files match upstream:
   53135c09fa15e9cb0a980b153b9634e0  File-Fetch-0.07.tar.gz
   53135c09fa15e9cb0a980b153b9634e0  File-Fetch-0.07.tar.gz-srpm
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock.
* rpmlint is silent.
X final provides and requires are sane.
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directory it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* %check is (essentially) not 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.

In light of other discussion I'll drop my objection.  APPROVED.

Imported, branches created, and builds requested.