Only one of the files (lib/OpenFrame/Argument/Blob.pm) seems to have a statement
of the license.  I don't think that's enough to suggest the license for the
entire package.

I wonder about the need for these:

Requires:       perl(File::Type) >= 0.01
Requires:       perl(HTTP::Request) >= 0.01
Requires:       perl(IO::Null) >= 0.01

The versions are so low that they seem to have been put in as placeholders.  RPM
should figure out all of these on its own.  (It doesn't find HTTP::Request but
it does find other modules, all provided by perl-libwww-perl.)

Some issues from the test suite:

t/02http_request....[OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::dispatch]
no response available
at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Pipeline/Dispatch.pm line 74
ok

t/98compile.........skipped
        all skipped: - do not have File::Find::Rule installed

I'm not sure if the first is a mock artifact or a problem with the test suite.
The second is fixed up with the obvious BR:.

Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
? license field matches the actual license.
? license is open source-compatible.
* source files match upstream:
   6469544c6c83a0aa33676421cb09d1a5  OpenFrame-3.05.tar.gz
   6469544c6c83a0aa33676421cb09d1a5  OpenFrame-3.05.tar.gz-srpm
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* rpmlint is silent.
? final provides and requires are sane:
   perl(OpenFrame)
   perl(OpenFrame::Argument::Blob)
   perl(OpenFrame::Constants)
   perl(OpenFrame::Cookie)
   perl(OpenFrame::Cookies)
   perl(OpenFrame::Object)
   perl(OpenFrame::Request)
   perl(OpenFrame::Response)
   perl(OpenFrame::Segment::ContentLoader)
   perl(OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Request)
   perl(OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response)
   perl-OpenFrame = 3.05-1.fc6
  -
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(CGI)
   perl(CGI::Cookie)
   perl(Exporter)
   perl(File::Spec)
   perl(File::Temp)
   perl(File::Type)
   perl(File::Type) >= 0.01
   perl(FileHandle)
   perl(HTTP::Headers)
   perl(HTTP::Request) >= 0.01
   perl(HTTP::Response)
   perl(HTTP::Status)
   perl(IO::Null)
   perl(IO::Null) >= 0.01
   perl(OpenFrame)
   perl(OpenFrame::Argument::Blob)
   perl(OpenFrame::Cookie)
   perl(OpenFrame::Cookies)
   perl(OpenFrame::Object)
   perl(OpenFrame::Request)
   perl(OpenFrame::Response)
   perl(OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response)
   perl(Pipeline)
   perl(Pipeline) >= 2.00
   perl(Pipeline::Production)
   perl(Pipeline::Segment)
   perl(base)
   perl(constant)
   perl(strict)
   perl(warnings::register)
* no shared libraries are present.
* 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 (after adding File::Find::Rule):
   All tests successful.
   Files=6, Tests=54,  1 wallclock secs ( 0.39 cusr +  0.16 csys =  0.55 CPU)
* 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.

(In reply to comment #1)
> Only one of the files (lib/OpenFrame/Argument/Blob.pm) seems to have a statement
> of the license.  I don't think that's enough to suggest the license for the
> entire package.

I've emailed the author (the one listed in that file anyway) for clarification.

> I wonder about the need for these:
> 
> Requires:       perl(File::Type) >= 0.01
> Requires:       perl(HTTP::Request) >= 0.01
> Requires:       perl(IO::Null) >= 0.01
> 
> The versions are so low that they seem to have been put in as placeholders.  RPM
> should figure out all of these on its own.  (It doesn't find HTTP::Request but
> it does find other modules, all provided by perl-libwww-perl.)

Fixed in -2.

>
t/02http_request....[OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::dispatch]
> no response available
> at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Pipeline/Dispatch.pm line 74
> ok
[...]
> I'm not sure if the first is a mock artifact or a problem with the test suite.

It happens when I'm not running under mock either.

> t/98compile.........skipped
>         all skipped: - do not have File::Find::Rule installed
[...]
> The second is fixed up with the obvious BR:.

Also fixed in -2.

http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-OpenFrame-3.05-2.src.rpm

Any luck hearing back from the author?  It kind of sucks to be blocked on this
kind of thing.

Nothing yet.  I'll try to bug them some more today.

I've opened a ticket.

  http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=19679

------- Additional Comments From tibbs.edu  2006-06-12 00:16 EST -------
I take it there's been no progress, which is too bad.  The author still seems to
be active and the Openframe author posted a blog just a couple of weeks ago. 
Unfortunately I just can't find anything that would work as a blanket license
for this package other than a statement that everything in the upstream SVN
repository is released under an OSI-approved license. 


------- Additional Comments From steve  2006-06-12 15:06 EST -------
I saw the mention of the OSI-approved license thing on their web site, but that
seems to be as specific as they get.

Maybe I'll get lucky and someone authoritative will be at YAPC in a couple of weeks.

I received the following message from the author:

> Hi,                                                                             
>                                                                                 
> I've been meaning to deal with this but I've not got around to it.              
> The OpenFrame package is released under both the Artistic license and           
> the GPL.                                                                        
>                                                                                 
> When we have another release of the package I'll ensure there is a              
> definitive license statement.                                                   
>                                                                                 
> Regards,                                                                        
> James.                                                                          

Excellent.  I suggest including that correspondence in the package; it should be
approveable after that but I've lost the context so I'll have to recheck.

I'm not entirely sure how much of the email I should include in the package.  (I
had to reach the author via a third party.  :-)

I've included the relevant bit in a README.LICENSE in -3.  Given that it is
confirmation of the license statement in lib/OpenFrame/Argument/Blob.pm, I hope
that's sufficient.

http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-OpenFrame-3.05-3.src.rpm

Yes, that looks reasonable; we now have some blanket statement of what the
license is.

Unfortunately the dependency list includes:
   perl(Pipeline)
   perl(Pipeline) >= 2.00

which has been clarified to be a blocker since this review was started.  That is
the only remaining issue.

(In reply to comment #10)
> Unfortunately the dependency list includes:
>    perl(Pipeline)
>    perl(Pipeline) >= 2.00
> 
> which has been clarified to be a blocker since this review was started.

For the record, I think that's silly.  :-)

It's fixed in -4 though.

http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-OpenFrame-3.05-4.src.rpm

Well, the versioned dependency is completely meaningless in that case, so
there's little point in having both.

The dependency list is now:
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(CGI)
   perl(CGI::Cookie)
   perl(Exporter)
   perl(File::Spec)
   perl(File::Temp)
   perl(File::Type)
   perl(FileHandle)
   perl(HTTP::Headers)
   perl(HTTP::Response)
   perl(HTTP::Status)
   perl(IO::Null)
   perl(OpenFrame)
   perl(OpenFrame::Argument::Blob)
   perl(OpenFrame::Cookie)
   perl(OpenFrame::Cookies)
   perl(OpenFrame::Object)
   perl(OpenFrame::Request)
   perl(OpenFrame::Response)
   perl(OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response)
   perl(Pipeline)
   perl(Pipeline::Production)
   perl(Pipeline::Segment)
   perl(base)
   perl(constant)
   perl(strict)

Looks good; APPROVED

Imported into CVS, branches created, and builds requested.