[Bug 886104] Review Request: plexus-component-factories-pom - Plexus Component Factories POM file
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886104 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-12-14 03:12:47 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ynm7308scga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819344] Review Request: gsbase - A collection of java utility classes
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819344 Bug 819344 depends on bug 819199, which changed state. Bug 819199 Summary: added maven pom https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819199 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=bLkVTmvjbDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821283] Review Request: gsbase - A collection of java utility classes
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821283 Bug 821283 depends on bug 819199, which changed state. Bug 819199 Summary: added maven pom https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819199 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Pdbv29bBiqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887176] New: Review Request: clojure-core-incubator - Proving ground for proposed new core fns
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887176 Bug ID: 887176 Summary: Review Request: clojure-core-incubator - Proving ground for proposed new core fns Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: punto...@libero.it Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/clojure-core-incubator.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/clojure-core-incubator-0.1.2-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Functions/macros variants of the ones that can be found in clojure.core. Fedora Account System Username: gil -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=N0vZUquPMGa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887148] Review Request: clojure-pom-contrib - org.clojure parent POMs
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887148 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||887176 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9yRaM7qQwUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887176] Review Request: clojure-core-incubator - Proving ground for proposed new core fns
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887176 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||887148 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1xedyfEjlDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887180] New: Review Request: clojure-tools-logging - Logging macros which delegate to a specific logging implementation
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887180 Bug ID: 887180 Summary: Review Request: clojure-tools-logging - Logging macros which delegate to a specific logging implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: punto...@libero.it Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/clojure-tools-logging.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/clojure-tools-logging-0.2.4-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Logging macros which delegate to a specific logging implementation. At runtime a specific implementation is selected from, in order, slf4j, Apache commons-logging, log4j, and finally java.util.logging. Fedora Account System Username: gil -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=TdxvgCvTHAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887148] Review Request: clojure-pom-contrib - org.clojure parent POMs
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887148 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||887180 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=XM0UDVmnmFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887180] Review Request: clojure-tools-logging - Logging macros which delegate to a specific logging implementation
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887180 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||887148 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cAld0DIMBLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823338] Review Request: rubygem-moneta - unified interface for key/value stores
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823338 --- Comment #6 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- Jonas, first of all, have you considered to replace moneta by juno [1] or something similar? I would say that this package is unmaintained by upstream and should not get into Fedora. Otherwise, a few comments: * Please drop the Requires: ruby - Since we are going to share gems between JRuby and Ruby in F19, it would pull in MRI even if not needed. * Test suite - I guess the test suite was developed for RSpec 1.x while you are trying to run it with RSpec 2.x. The shared examples are typically troublesome. - I am not going to dig more into it, but would you please mind to keep the disabled %check section with appropriate comment in .spec file? It would help during future updates (if there every will be some) to easily uncomment and see what is the state of test suite. [1] https://github.com/minad/juno -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8OZEahKBWQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 733925] Review Request: libdatrie - double-array trie implementation library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733925 --- Comment #6 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- Any progress here? Aurimas, are you still interested? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=YT0IZibnhBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 815001] Review Request: opennebula - Cloud computing tool to manage a distributed virtual data center to build private, public and hybrid IaaS clouds
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815001 --- Comment #9 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- Shawn, any progress here? Are you going to update the spec according to the comments? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=83RxhrURQfa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 815001] Review Request: opennebula - Cloud computing tool to manage a distributed virtual data center to build private, public and hybrid IaaS clouds
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815001 --- Comment #10 from Shawn Starr shawn.st...@rogers.com --- Some of the changes need to be discussed further with upstream. I'm dealing with personal issues right now, ie, looking for work. I've had no time to look at this unfortunately. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GydLF4sI9va=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886104] Review Request: plexus-component-factories-pom - Plexus Component Factories POM file
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886104 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- plexus-component-factories-pom-1.0-0.3.alpha11.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/plexus-component-factories-pom-1.0-0.3.alpha11.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rnqRXCWSUra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886104] Review Request: plexus-component-factories-pom - Plexus Component Factories POM file
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886104 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- plexus-component-factories-pom-1.0-0.3.alpha11.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/plexus-component-factories-pom-1.0-0.3.alpha11.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ATMrjhsWBHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 859112] Review Request: glassfish-gmbal - GlassFish MBean Annotation Library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=859112 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-gmbal.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/glassfish-gmbal-3.2.0-0.1.b003.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rn3ue84YBca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823338] Review Request: rubygem-moneta - unified interface for key/value stores
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823338 --- Comment #7 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Just a note regarding the test suite: It expects modules that have been added to the repository after the gem has been released (and the structure of the lib folder changed as well), so this is not a problem (or just a problem) with version of RSpec. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=T2QSczmMTra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 815018] Review Request: nodejs - javascript fast build framework
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815018
--- Comment #66 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com ---
Some additions:
I'd also like to see node.js in EPEL6
Running rpmlint, I've found a few issues:
nodejs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/node 0775L
nodejs-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
nodejs.src:90: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/dtrace
and licensecheck finds a few different licenses:
Apache (v2.0)
-
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/tools/closure_linter/closure_linter/javascriptstatetracker.py
Unknown or generated
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/tools/osx-productsign.sh
MIT/X11 (BSD like)
--
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/src/slab_allocator.h
BSD (3 clause)
--
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/tools/js2c.py
ISC
---
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/test/gc/node_modules/weak/src/weakref.cc
BSD (2 clause)
--
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/deps/v8/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc
The latter one can be ignored, IMHO, because we're using our own v8 (and during
prep deps/v8 is also cleared out).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=iIFgbOyo7Ra=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878188] Review Request: qt5-qtbase - Qt5 - QtBase components
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878188 --- Comment #8 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl --- Is there any particular reason why you've added a custom Qt5.pc file? Upstream doesn't provide this and other distros like Ubuntu also don't provide this file. From the looks of it, upstream is expecting developers to use one of the other pkg-config files which is bundled with Qt5, like Qt5Core.pc. If its only purpose is to provide variables like the installation paths and the location of qmake and moc then I guess it would make more sense to ask upstream to add this information to one of the already bundled pkg-config files like Qt5Core.pc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=0zBdP6PkARa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823338] Review Request: rubygem-moneta - unified interface for key/value stores
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823338 --- Comment #8 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #6) Jonas, Ups, sorry s/Jonas/Julian/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xXwjjCtY42a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823338] Review Request: rubygem-moneta - unified interface for key/value stores
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823338 --- Comment #9 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- Actually, there is upstream ticket [1] to drop this dependency. Julian, could you please try to push Chef upstream a bit? Thank you. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=AnBsootijja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 844721] Review request: python-django-flash - A Django extension to provide support for Rails-like flash
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844721 Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||Stalled Submitter --- Comment #14 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- And another ping, please continue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DXJcRSaeBaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 845115] Review request: python-django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845115 Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||Stalled Submitter --- Comment #10 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- and another ping -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WyjBfNCVB7a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819480] Review Request: limesurvey - a web-based survey application
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819480 --- Comment #25 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- Any progress here? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fTOrqUL6A7a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877969] Review Request: python-uinput - Pythonic API to the Linux uinput kernel module
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877969 Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-12-14 07:04:37 --- Comment #15 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- since it's built and pushed, we could close this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VutI2zJPcra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 863145] Review Request: listadmin - Command line interface to mailman mailing lists
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863145
Trond H. Amundsen t.h.amund...@usit.uio.no changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||t.h.amund...@usit.uio.no
--- Comment #5 from Trond H. Amundsen t.h.amund...@usit.uio.no ---
(In reply to comment #4)
%doc %{_mandir}/man1/listadmin.1.gz
As in comment 2, files below %{_mandir} are marked as %doc automatically.
It's not necessary to use %doc here explicitly.
Also, and this is a major nitpick, you shouldn't specify .gz here, as the
compression used for manpages may change in the future. In addition, it
increases the portability of the spec, as other rpm-based distros use other
compression algorithms. I believe e.g. SUSE uses bzip2. This should do:
%{_mandir}/man1/listadmin.1*
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=OOVfLXnPCqa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 884759] Review Request: toilet - colorful ASCII art generator
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884759
--- Comment #9 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Summary:figlet alternative
could you please rephrase the Summary in a way that it starts with
a capital letter?
Even better, replace the summary with a clear and concise one. Such as the one
used for the title of this ticket:
Summary: Colorful ASCII Art Generator
Taking the summary from the manual page, it would be:
Summary: Display large colorful characters
Referencing the figlet utility might be sane in the longer description,
although it requires the reader to know the figlet utility. In the summary,
however, it should be possible to sum up what a package does without
referring to the name of some other package or piece of software. Don't focus
on what the package/software is named. The package %name is for that, and the
%description can also expand on the name of the software.
%{_datadir}/figlet/*
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IXCURgcHVna=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878188] Review Request: qt5-qtbase - Qt5 - QtBase components
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878188 --- Comment #9 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Sure, upstreaming it makes sense (we do the same in our qt(4) packaging too), just never got around to it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=s3hi7TjnSna=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] New: Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 Bug ID: 887244 Summary: Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client/perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client/perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: This module implements client for OrangeHRM information system. It has been developed against Red Hat instance, so I cannot guarantee it works with other instances. Fedora Account System Username: ppisar This package will go into Fedora ≥ 17. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=YOtHby9441a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823332] Review Request: rubygem-mixlib-log - Ruby mixin for simple log functionality
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823332 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jd...@aquezada.com, ||jstri...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- * There is a newer upstream version out [1]. In Fedora we try to stay with the latest upstream version when possible. * Specs should be included in the -doc subpackage Note: specs are already included in the latest version of the gem [1] * %check section should ran also other specs that come with the 1.4.1 * The Ruby runtime dependency needs to be dropped in order to support multiple Ruby implementations in Fedora 19 - delete Requires: ruby [1] http://rubygems.org/gems/mixlib-log/versions/1.4.1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4wuxeVzcN8a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823337] Review Request: rubygem-mixlib-shellout - mixin for running external commands
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823337 --- Comment #11 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- * Test suite fails - Seems that test suite depends on awesome_print? /usr/share/rubygems/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in `require': cannot load such file -- ap (LoadError) I tried to remove it and the test suite works. So please do sed -i /^require 'ap'$/ s/^/#/ spec/spec_helper.rb and report it upstream. Nevertheless, there is still one test failure: 1) Mixlib::ShellOut when executing the command with a current working directory when running under Unix should chdir to the working directory Failure/Error: should eql(fully_qualified_cwd) expected: /bin got: /usr/bin This seems to be caused by UsrMove and should be resolved with upstream. - The '-Ilib' seems to be superfluous. * I woudl move the README into -doc subpackage, but it is more the matter of taste. The package looks quite good otherwise. But let's fix the test suite first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QVkxkHOVIoa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823352] Review Request: rubygem-chef - a client for the Chef config management system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823352 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vondr...@redhat.com --- Comment #11 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- Julian, could you please update the spec to the latest chef? Also, could you please check the jsou dependency with upstream? The latest chef specifies dependency on json = 1.6.1, = 1.4.4, but we have in Fedora json 1.7.5 already, if I am not mistaken. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Ya0G4Mm2Nqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823331] Review Request: rubygem-mixlib-authentication - Ruby class-based header signing authentication object
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823331
Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jd...@aquezada.com,
||jstri...@redhat.com
Depends On||823332
--- Comment #1 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com ---
* There is a newer upstream version that most likely does not need patching [1]
* Requires: ruby should be dropped to support more implementations of Ruby in
f19
* Please consider moving specs into the -doc subpackage rather than exclude
them
* README.rdoc and NOTICE could be part of the -doc subpackage as they are not
needed at runtime and marked as %doc
* I would suggest you to exclude %{gem_cache} as it's not needed
Because this gem requires rubygem-mixlib-log, I am adding related depends on.
@Julian C. Dunn: I am adding you to CC, because you showed interest in packing
rubygem-chef (#823352).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JZIKjijCEla=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823332] Review Request: rubygem-mixlib-log - Ruby mixin for simple log functionality
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823332 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||823331 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Qde6Lsl7Zea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823331] Review Request: rubygem-mixlib-authentication - Ruby class-based header signing authentication object
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823331 --- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- I am sorry, I forgot the link: [1] http://rubygems.org/gems/mixlib-authentication/versions/1.3.0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GC8IUgki0Ba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mizde...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mizde...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com --- I am taking this review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6HzPUpx0zSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244
Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: CheckResultdir
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Perl:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires and Reguires:.
[x]: CPAN urls should be non-versioned.
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[!]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
Note: Source0 (WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-v0.1.1.tar.gz)
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
Rpmlint
---
Checking: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc19.src.rpm
perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc19.noarch.rpm
2 packages and 0
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #24 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ylnVvuW3vIa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 839091] Review Request: kyua-atf-compat - ATF compatibility tools
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839091 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process | | Wait for someone to review your package! At this point in the process, | the fedora-review flag is blank, meaning that no reviewer is assigned. An incorrectly/mistakably set fedora-review flag causes the ticket to be listed as being worked on by somebody. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hATYkrYQ3Ta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 842107] Review Request: sugar-america - Game about the America geography
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=842107 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process | | Wait for someone to review your package! At this point in the process, | the fedora-review flag is blank, meaning that no reviewer is assigned. An incorrectly/mistakably set fedora-review flag causes the ticket to be listed as being worked on by somebody. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kSd7EgUaHka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 851267] Review Request: arc-gui-clients - ARC Graphical Clients
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851267 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|volke...@gmx.at -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=NwXwDsdph3a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885317] Review Request: kdevelop-python - Python Plugin for KDevelop
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885317 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process | | Wait for someone to review your package! At this point in the process, | the fedora-review flag is blank, meaning that no reviewer is assigned. An incorrectly/mistakably set fedora-review flag causes the ticket to be listed as being worked on by somebody. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qDgAkAIYZZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 861591] Review Request: openteacher - An application that helps you learn a foreign language
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=861591 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- openteacher-3.0-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openteacher-3.0-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=iipaJW1ahSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #32 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com --- (In reply to comment #31) How can I know all the right dependencies ? Only by becoming intimately familiar with the software you want to package, by examining its Python source code, and by using Yum or repoquery to locate needed packages. For example, you can use your favourite search tool to locate import statements. Then find out what packages include the needed Python modules. I thought that it was a task of upstream what of listing all right dependencies ... The primary task would be to get the BuildRequires right, so the build doesn't fail and no features, which could be enabled, get disabled. The secondary (and somewhat less important) task would be to complete the run-time dependencies. To mark your package as depending on other packages. gir1.2-gdkpixbuf-2.0: GDK Pixbuf libraries - introspection GObject -- gdk-pixbuf2 on Fedora ? Reviewing Debian packages is outside the scope of this package review request. You would need to be familiar with the contents of those packages to tell whether they include Python stuff. What does gdk-pixbuf2 include that would be needed? Every 'import' statements indicate a python module (I think) so for example (related package names enclosed in parenthesis): distutils (python-distutils-extra) - cmd.py (pypy-libs, python-libs) - os.py (python-libs) - glob.py (python-libs) - shlex.py (python-libs) - subprocess.py (python-libs) - shutil.py (python-libs) - polib.py (python-polib) - ConfigParser.py (python-libs) - codecs.py (python-libs) - msgfmt -- msgfmt.py -- sys.py (shedskin) - os.py (python-libs) - getopt (shedskin) - struct (shedskin, python-libs) - array (shedskin) comun.py -- os.py (python-libs) - locale.py (pypy-libs, python-libs) - gettext.py (python-libs) and so on. However, if it is a right procedure, the same '.py' file is provided as a part of more rpm packages and it is difficult to know which is the right one. $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0/GdkPixbuf-2.0.typelib gdk-pixbuf2-2.26.5-1.fc18.x86_64 Ah! gir1.2-poppler-0.18: rendering library for PDF based on Xpdf -- pypoppler on Fedora ? pypoppler on Fedora only provides a Python module poppler (lower-case first letter!), but nothing to satisfy: updf.py:from gi.repository import Poppler, Gtk, Gdk, GObject, GdkPixbuf $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0/Poppler-0.18.typelib poppler-glib-0.20.2-9.fc18.x86_64 Ah! :| BuildRequires: pycairo-devel BuildRequires: pygobject3-devel BuildRequires: gdk-pixbuf2-devel Have you added these BuildRequires because building updf failed without them? Do these packages contain Python stuff needed to build updf? If in doubt, examine what's included in those packages. Maybe they are useless. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=m9np4Md9oLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 861591] Review Request: openteacher - An application that helps you learn a foreign language
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=861591 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- openteacher-3.0-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openteacher-3.0-2.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VIrd9I2yoHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880195] Review Request: python-di - Dependency injection library for python unittesters
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880195 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com --- I'd prefer a new tarball new srpm release during review but oh well... Looks OK now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=B6tvP3UG2Ka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 861591] Review Request: openteacher - An application that helps you learn a foreign language
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=861591 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- openteacher-3.0-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openteacher-3.0-2.fc16 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=eDp5xkKQpUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855588] Review Request: ghc-concrete-typerep - Provides Binary and Hashable instances for TypeRep.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855588 --- Comment #6 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com --- #01 Group is deprecated #02 Please mention the name of the package and the version in the patch filename #03 Can you please update the spec using cabal2rpm? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GI7VsfliSla=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 766604] Review Request: Bashmount
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=766604 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|i.am.fedora...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=MRUrYSlDqda=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 817391] Review Request: jupiter - Jupiter Hardware Control System for Computers
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817391 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #33 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process | | Wait for someone to review your package! At this point in the process, | the fedora-review flag is blank, meaning that no reviewer is assigned. An incorrectly/mistakably set fedora-review flag causes the ticket to be listed as being worked on by somebody. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=bpzp11yw5Ya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824083] Review Request: nyancat - A terminal Nyan Cat renderer
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824083 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|codebl...@elrod.me -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=b0tnS7UJhXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client Short Description: Client for OrangeHRM Owners: ppisar jplesnik psabata Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: perl-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4MO3LNglTta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7LIpiMFDpma=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #33 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- I thought that it was a task of upstream what of listing all right dependencies ... Some do that, others don't do that. Some add a good README with installation instructions. Others add build scripts that examine the build environment for everything that's needed. Some add safety-checks to the executable, so it wouldn't crash at run-time. Others don't care whether a crash prints just a Python traceback or triggers something like ABRT in Fedora. ;-) msgfmt.py -- sys.py (shedskin) Clearly, and not limited to this example, import sys is for the Python Standard Library, not shedskin. Most likely you forgot to consider the default search path for modules, which is not where shedskin stores its files, does it? However, if it is a right procedure, the same '.py' file is provided as a part of more rpm packages and it is difficult to know which is the right one. In standard search path for Python Modules? That would be a packaging bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=s7EuthsGrta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 815018] Review Request: nodejs - javascript fast build framework
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815018
--- Comment #67 from Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to comment #66)
Some additions:
I'd also like to see node.js in EPEL6
So would I, but it's not going to happen. Node.js requires much newer
dependencies than we have in EPEL 6. Specifically, we need openssl 1.0.1 or
later as well as http_parser 2.0 or later. OpenSSL is a full-stop problem,
since that's carried in the core RHEL 6 and there's no way that Red Hat is
going to rebase that one. We can try to make requests that they backport the
SPDY patches to OpenSSL 1.0.0, but I don't know how successful we would be
there.
Running rpmlint, I've found a few issues:
nodejs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/node 0775L
That's strange. I don't see that when running rpmlint 1.4 on Fedora 18. I
checked it against a local build and the one from Koji. Where did you see that?
Regardless, I'm explicitly setting it to 0755 now to be safe.
nodejs-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
Oof, this was a bit of a pain in the neck. They have build scripts to build
either debug builds with no optimization, or fully optimized builds with no
symbols. I've added a patch to deal with this.
nodejs.src:90: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/dtrace
This is a false-positive. It's intentionally hardcoded in order to ensure that
we clear out the one generated (inappropriately) during the build. It's always
guaranteed to be in %{prefix}/lib (not %{_libdir}).
and licensecheck finds a few different licenses:
Apache (v2.0)
-
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/
tools/closure_linter/closure_linter/javascriptstatetracker.py
Unknown or generated
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/
tools/osx-productsign.sh
MIT/X11 (BSD like)
--
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/
src/slab_allocator.h
BSD (3 clause)
--
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/
tools/js2c.py
ISC
---
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/
test/gc/node_modules/weak/src/weakref.cc
BSD (2 clause)
--
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/node-v0.9.3/
deps/v8/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc
The latter one can be ignored, IMHO, because we're using our own v8 (and
during prep deps/v8 is also cleared out).
Thanks, I've added all of these. The OSX productsign one I'm assuming is
covered under the Node MIT license (and it's not used when building on Linux
either). According to the license guidelines, both BSD licenses fall under the
BSD shortname, so they're both covered.
SPEC: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/nodejs/nodejs.spec
SRPM:
http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/nodejs/nodejs-0.9.3-6.fc18.src.rpm
Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4790864
Matthias, if you're doing the review, would you mind self-assigning and setting
fedora-review?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pQgOS4AA2ba=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823351] Review Request: rubygem-yajl-ruby - Ruby C bindings to YAJL - a JSON stream-based parser
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823351 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||vondr...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- I'll take it for a review, since it is dependency of rubygem-chef. Not sure if Jonas is active though. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JIlyvfFAZHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #34 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com --- (In reply to comment #33) Some do that, others don't do that. I have a tough nut to crack :) msgfmt.py -- sys.py (shedskin) Clearly, and not limited to this example, import sys is for the Python Standard Library, not shedskin. Most likely you forgot to consider the default search path for modules, which is not where shedskin stores its files, does it? However, if it is a right procedure, the same '.py' file is provided as a part of more rpm packages and it is difficult to know which is the right one. In standard search path for Python Modules? That would be a packaging bug. For example: $ yum provides */sys.py Plugin abilitati:langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit pyjamas-0.7-10.fc18.noarch : A python to Javascript compiler, Widget set, Framework and Toolkit Repo : fedora Corrispondenza trovata in: Nome file : /usr/share/pyjamas/pyjs/src/pyjs/lib/sys.py python3-postgresql-1.0.2-4.fc18.x86_64 : Connect to PostgreSQL with Python 3 Repo : fedora Corrispondenza trovata in: Nome file : /usr/lib64/python3.3/site-packages/postgresql/sys.py shedskin-0.9-3.fc18.noarch : Python to C++ compiler Repo : fedora Corrispondenza trovata in: Nome file : /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/shedskin/lib/sys.py How can I know which is the right one ? :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=p3xYTutSBEa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED Fixed In Version||perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0 ||.1.1-1.fc19 --- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- Thank you for the review and the repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PrLmTvnMhSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WVfTyuLQMAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2lmbYAqE9ba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880882] Review Request: php-JsonSchema - PHP implementation of JSON schema
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880882 --- Comment #6 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- Created attachment 663620 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=663620action=edit phpci-src.log -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ljMOlvR8yta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880882] Review Request: php-JsonSchema - PHP implementation of JSON schema
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880882 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com --- Comment #8 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- Created attachment 663624 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=663624action=edit php-JsonSchema-review.txt Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16 Buildroot used: fedora-17-x86_64 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 880882 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=KTnjD7vImPa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880882] Review Request: php-JsonSchema - PHP implementation of JSON schema
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880882 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- All seems fine. No blocker. === APPROVED === -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3TjKWnajuCa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823333] Review Request: rubygem-mixlib-cli - a ruby gem mixin for CLI support, including option parsing
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=82
Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jd...@aquezada.com,
||jstri...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com ---
* Remove Requires: ruby for other Ruby interpretations to be used with in f19
* Rakefile, NOTICE and README.rdoc are not require during runtime
- Please consider moving them into the -doc subpackage
* Please consider moving specs into the -doc subpackage rather than exclude
them
* I would suggest you to exclude %{gem_cache} as it's not needed
* Tests print:
You must supply -r!
Usage: /usr/local/bin/rspec (options)
-r
..
- Tests shouldn't print STDOUT like this. It could be fixed by something
suggested on stackoverflow [1].
[1]
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1496019/suppresing-output-to-console-with-ruby
@Julian C. Dunn: Adding you to CC. Could you please take over this bug?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=OdowK9G40ma=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823334] Review Request: rubygem-mixlib-config - class-based config mixin for ruby scripts
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823334
Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jd...@aquezada.com,
||jstri...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com ---
* Remove Requires: ruby for other Ruby interpretations to be used with in f19
* Rakefile, NOTICE and README.rdoc are not require during runtime
- Please consider moving them into the -doc subpackage
* Please consider moving specs into the -doc subpackage rather than exclude
them
* I would suggest you to also exclude %{gem_cache} as it's not needed
* Running rspec -Ilib spec/mixlib/config_spec.rb prints a lot (a lot!) of
stuff.
- I believe it would be nice to supress it [1]
[1]
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1496019/suppresing-output-to-console-with-ruby
@Julian C. Dunn: Adding you to CC. Would you mind to take over this package?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HEFg3eRj6va=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823351] Review Request: rubygem-yajl-ruby - Ruby C bindings to YAJL - a JSON stream-based parser
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823351
--- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
* Keep Gemfile and %{gem_name}.gemspec
- Please consider to keep above mentioned files in -doc subpackage. Although
they are not needed for runtime, they were originally shipped by upstream,
so lets try to keep the modifications limited.
* Move files not needed for runtime into -doc subpackage
- Please consider to move following files/directories into -doc subpackage,
since they are not needed for runtime IMO:
%doc %{gem_instdir}/CHANGELOG.md
%doc %{gem_instdir}/README.md
%{gem_instdir}/benchmark
%{gem_instdir}/spec
%{gem_instdir}/tasks
* Package does not own the binary extension directories
- The %{gem_extdir}/lib/yajl/yajl.so means that only the yajl.so file is
owned by the package. Please use %{gem_extdir} instead, to own the whole
directory structure including the .so file.
* Exclude %{gem_cache}
- Please exclude %{gem_cache}. This file is not needed on Fedora.
* Bundled library
- This gem contains bundled YAJL library. Please work with upstream to allow
to use the YAJL available on system.
- I already submitted issue upstream:
https://github.com/brianmario/yajl-ruby/issues/111
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LCIuKtBNXGa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880882] Review Request: php-JsonSchema - PHP implementation of JSON schema
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880882 Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com --- THANKS for the review and tips! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: php-JsonSchema Short Description: PHP implementation of JSON schema Owners: siwinski Branches: f17 f18 el6 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pEyopr1lKAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- tw-0.9.4-7.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tw-0.9.4-7.fc16 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=o5Yv041zkea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886903] Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886903 --- Comment #1 from Erik Schilling ablu.erikschill...@googlemail.com --- It looks to me like the specfile uses nexuiz as binary name? Shouldn't Xonotic be used there? Also I am not sure whether xonotic should really obsolote nexuiz. Of course nexuiz upstream is dead and simply removing nexuiz's darkplaces might make packaging easier. But xonotic does NOT offer compatibility to nexuiz servers. People who still play Nexuiz would be force updated to Xonotic and cannot play on their favourite servers anymore. Regards Erik -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=OFFmJeBpNEa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880882] Review Request: php-JsonSchema - PHP implementation of JSON schema
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880882 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=vgMef7u31ra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886903] Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886903 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- It builds nexuiz, so I used nexuiz. I can symlink xonotic if you like. Re replacement, I think simply moving on is the way to go. If during the course of the review enough people object I might reconsider, but as of now I don't envision that happening. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qIW1msizTja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886300] Review Request: sino - High performance text search engine
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886300
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@zarb.org
--- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org ---
doesn't build in mock :
+ CFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
-fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -fPIC'
+ make -j4 perl
make[1]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/sino-3.1.21/src'
make[1]: warning: jobserver unavailable: using -j1. Add `+' to parent make
rule.
make[2]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/sino-3.1.21/src'
make[2]: Nothing to be done for `cc'.
make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/sino-3.1.21/src'
make[2]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/sino-3.1.21/libperl'
`./pcc` -c -I `perl -MConfig -e 'print $Config{archlib}'`/CORE sinoapi_wrap.c
sinoapi_wrap.c:702:20: fatal error: EXTERN.h: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [sinoapi_wrap.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/sino-3.1.21/libperl'
make[1]: *** [perl] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/sino-3.1.21/src'
make: *** [perl] Error 2
erreur : Mauvais statut de sortie pour /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Hbmfwl (%build)
Mauvais statut de sortie pour /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Hbmfwl (%build)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4x1N5jjbMEa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886903] Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886903 --- Comment #3 from Erik Schilling ablu.erikschill...@googlemail.com --- It should not be nessecary to mention nexuiz anywhere in the specfile (except in the Obsolute-Field maybe...) You can check the building process here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?expand=1file=xonotic.specpackage=xonoticproject=home%3AAblu%3Abranches%3Agames I think it is done correct there. Regards, Erik -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DoLoWaqveBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886903] Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886903 --- Comment #4 from Erik Schilling ablu.erikschill...@googlemail.com --- Hm. It looks like this specfile does not include the d0_blind_id. You can find it in Xonotic/source/d0_blind_id. It is required for collecting stats for stats.xonotic.org and for saving race records. Not having it will make getting statistics impossible. Regards, Erik -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9C0oNA9CI6a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819480] Review Request: limesurvey - a web-based survey application
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819480 --- Comment #26 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com --- Not much. I filed the upstream bug a while back: http://bugs.limesurvey.org/view.php?id=6362 no reply upstream that I see, but it's possible that it's fixed in a newer version. I've not had time to package up the newest upstream, but that would be the next thing to do, and see if they have this fixed upstream already or if we can work around the issue in some other way. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=iypUIeX3gfa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840244] Review Request: surf-geometry - Tool to visualize some real algebraic geometry
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840244 Paulo Andrade paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #24 from Paulo Andrade paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: surf-geometry New Branches: f18 Owners: pcpa InitialCC: pcpa Required to simplify a possible sagemath update package by having f19 dependencies built in f18. This package was approved shortly after the f18 branch. It should also simplify the Singular package, that would then not need a spec for f18 and another for f19+. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qdflr1e3aya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #35 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- yum provides */sys.py Wrong query. :) Basically, due to using the '*' wildcard, you here accept _any_ path. But a sys.py or sys.so in a location that is private to an arbitrary program does not matter at all here. Unless you tell Python to look for modules in that location. The paths you've found are not in Python's default list of module search paths: $ python ... import sys print sys.path ['', '/usr/lib64/python27.zip', '/usr/lib64/python2.7', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/plat-linux2', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/lib-tk', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/lib-old', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/lib-dynload', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/PIL', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/gst-0.10', '/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/gtk-2.0', '/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages', '/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/setuptools-0.6c11-py2.7.egg-info'] Btw, Python modules sys, os and many others are well-known as being part of the Python Standard Library: http://docs.python.org/2/library/ You would not spend time on trying to search for them. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9s0ybEqUxWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840244] Review Request: surf-geometry - Tool to visualize some real algebraic geometry
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840244 --- Comment #25 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=G0QBqOrutba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840244] Review Request: surf-geometry - Tool to visualize some real algebraic geometry
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840244 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- surf-geometry-1.0.6-4.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/surf-geometry-1.0.6-4.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=EXUB80IptJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799702] Review Request: python-ufl - A compiler for finite element variational forms
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799702 --- Comment #9 from Fabian Affolter m...@fabian-affolter.ch --- Thanks for the review, Tomas. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=c8kFEinvfEa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799702] Review Request: python-ufl - A compiler for finite element variational forms
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799702 Fabian Affolter m...@fabian-affolter.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Fabian Affolter m...@fabian-affolter.ch --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-ufl Short Description: A compiler for finite element variational forms Owners: fab Branches: F17 F18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=iN9UHy1cNAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799702] Review Request: python-ufl - A compiler for finite element variational forms
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799702 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ys5o7cWFwGa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877651] Review Request: sagemath - A free open-source mathematics software system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||loganje...@gmail.com --- Comment #16 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com --- Have you applied for bundling exceptions for cython, ipython, and pexpect? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FAE6HbWn2Fa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #36 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com --- The requested packages should be python-libs, python-polib, pycairo, numpy, librsvg2, poppler-glib, gdk-pixbuf2, gtk2, gobject-introspection -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=T2Dbibf3zOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877651] Review Request: sagemath - A free open-source mathematics software system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 --- Comment #17 from Paulo Andrade paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #16) Have you applied for bundling exceptions for cython, ipython, and pexpect? Not yet. I was expecting to need to ask for bundling during or after the review process. I will make a bundling exception request. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=jAT90V1DZaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877651] Review Request: sagemath - A free open-source mathematics software system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 --- Comment #18 from Volker Braun vbr...@physics.upenn.edu --- If you apply the patch from http://trac.sagemath.org/13740 then you should be able to use the Fedora Cython rpm. At least it fixes an incompatibility with Cython-0.17.2, so probably also 0.17.1 (Fedora 18). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=11MA08zhyXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877651] Review Request: sagemath - A free open-source mathematics software system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 --- Comment #19 from Paulo Andrade paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #18) If you apply the patch from http://trac.sagemath.org/13740 then you should be able to use the Fedora Cython rpm. At least it fixes an incompatibility with Cython-0.17.2, so probably also 0.17.1 (Fedora 18). I asked for bundling exceptions in https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/238 I did comment about bundling cython that hopefully it would be temporary. In my Mandriva sagemath packages I did for some time either make my own patches or use patches from trac.sagemath.org, but that caused trouble because system cython could be upgraded in the mean time, making the sagemath package no longer buildable or generating a broken package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=D7Bcl7NiG8a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877651] Review Request: sagemath - A free open-source mathematics software system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ndbeck...@gmail.com --- Comment #20 from Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com --- Ironic. Why is cython even in fedora? Because a good while back, we discussed packaging sage. At the time, I volunteered to package cython as a first step. Now, I don't even use cython , and then I learn sage won't use it either. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=TndltdBUBga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #37 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com --- source(In reply to comment #31) If you follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers to step 2.1.8 you could submit a scratch build in the Fedora Build System. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4791786 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=eyNv41PuVRa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877651] Review Request: sagemath - A free open-source mathematics software system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 --- Comment #21 from Paulo Andrade paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- Minor corrections so that it builds cleanly in f18: - The fplll patch is also required to build in f18. - Add factory include to plural.pyx build. Spec URL: http://pcpa.fedorapeople.org/sagemath.spec SRPM URL: http://pcpa.fedorapeople.org/sagemath/SRPMS/sagemath-5.4.1-4.fc19.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Bd7S5W1Jhra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 865116] Review Request: inih-devel - small C INI parsing library
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865116
--- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
I'm a bit confused about:
http://www.debuginfo.com/articles/gendebuginfo.html#debuginfostaticlib
That's a page about Visual C++.
Name: inih-devel
Provides: inih-static = %{version}-%{release}
Wouldn't it be more future-proof to name the src.rpm inih? And make it build
only a -devel subpackage with a virtual -static package (or vice versa).
Summary: Simple INI file parser
Summary: Simple INI file parser library
Mentioning the term library could be helpful as the package name does not
start with lib.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gFEG0OjIFma=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877651] Review Request: sagemath - A free open-source mathematics software system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651 --- Comment #22 from Volker Braun vbr...@physics.upenn.edu --- I agree that Cython upgrades have been troublesome in the past. But, for the record, with the patch http://trac.sagemath.org/13740 Sage can use up to Cython 0.17.3 (released today). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=t9hvFmKPmja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886300] Review Request: sino - High performance text search engine
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886300 --- Comment #2 from François Cami f...@fcami.net --- Ooops, good catch, thanks. Spec URL: http://fcami.fedorapeople.org/srpms/sino.spec SRPM URL: http://fcami.fedorapeople.org/srpms/sino-3.1.21-2.fc16.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZKqXGmPggDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mwBPocodzaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887244] Review Request: perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client - Client for OrangeHRM
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887244 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-WWW-OrangeHRM-Client-0.1.1-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PfKulcUWUca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886022] Review Request: pyzy - The Chinese PinYin and Bopomofo conversion library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886022 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WGs3cNg1Dea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886022] Review Request: pyzy - The Chinese PinYin and Bopomofo conversion library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886022 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package pyzy-0.1.0-4.fc18, ibus-pinyin-1.4.99.20120808-2.fc18: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing pyzy-0.1.0-4.fc18 ibus-pinyin-1.4.99.20120808-2.fc18' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-20373/pyzy-0.1.0-4.fc18,ibus-pinyin-1.4.99.20120808-2.fc18 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5kxQW3E20qa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856002] Review Request: plug - Linux software for Fender Mustang amplifiers
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856002 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-12-14 18:31:42 --- Comment #14 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Packages for all the requested Git branches are marked as stable now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=NwwXA55FZJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886492] Review Request: openslides - Presentation and assembly system
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886492
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4792449
$ rpmlint -i -v *
openslides.src: I: checking
openslides.src: I: checking-url http://pypi.python.org/pypi/openslides/1.3
(timeout 10 seconds)
openslides.src: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/o/openslides/openslides-1.3.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
openslides.noarch: I: checking
openslides.noarch: I: checking-url http://pypi.python.org/pypi/openslides/1.3
(timeout 10 seconds)
openslides.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary openslides
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
openslides.spec: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/o/openslides/openslides-1.3.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Nothing of interest.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
GPLv2+
[+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
05de4a169c170298c40a47ef92c53b8831162b36e4ef811a162a3e00a9e48d5b
openslides-1.3.tar.gz
05de4a169c170298c40a47ef92c53b8831162b36e4ef811a162a3e00a9e48d5b
openslides-1.3.tar.gz.orig
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[.] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either
[Bug 873395] Review Request: php-horde-Horde-Thrift - Thrift
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=873395 --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/remicollet/remirepo/master/php/horde/php-horde-Horde-Thrift/php-horde-Horde-Thrift.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/SRPMS/php-horde-Horde-Thrift-2.0.1-1.remi.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=BCJUJ5P3Vra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
