[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999 --- Comment #5 from Lukas Brabec --- I updated the files: Spec URL: https://lbrabec.fedorapeople.org/python-xunitparser.spec SRPM URL: https://lbrabec.fedorapeople.org/python-xunitparser-1.3.3-1.fc24.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1333235] New: Review Request: gap-pkg-crisp - Computing subgroups of finite soluble groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333235 Bug ID: 1333235 Summary: Review Request: gap-pkg-crisp - Computing subgroups of finite soluble groups Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-crisp/gap-pkg-crisp.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-crisp/gap-pkg-crisp-1.4.4-1.fc25.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: CRISP (Computing with Radicals, Injectors, Schunck classes and Projectors) provides algorithms for computing subgroups of finite soluble groups related to group classes. In particular, it allows to compute F-radicals and F-injectors for Fitting classes (and Fitting sets) F, F-residuals for formations F, and X-projectors for Schunck classes X. In order to carry out these computations, the group classes F and X must be given by an algorithm which decides membership in the group class. Moreover, CRISP contains algorithms for the computation of normal subgroups invariant under a prescribed set of automorphisms and belonging to a given group class. This includes an improved method to compute the set of all normal subgroups of a finite soluble group, its characteristic subgroups, and the socle and p-socles for given primes p. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328350] Review Request: python-osrf-pycommon - Commonly needed Python modules used by software developed at OSRF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328350 Scott K Logan changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |python-osrf_pycommon - |python-osrf-pycommon - |Commonly needed Python |Commonly needed Python |modules used by software|modules used by software |developed at OSRF |developed at OSRF -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332344] Review Request: phototonic - Image viewer and organizer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332344 --- Comment #3 from Michael Cullen --- Updated version now upstream have tagged a release properly: Spec URL: http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/mich181189/phototonic/phototonic.git/plain/phototonic.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mich181189/phototonic/fedora-24-x86_64/00183358-phototonic/phototonic-1.7.20-1.fc24.src.rpm scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13925343 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332344] Review Request: phototonic - Image viewer and organizer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332344 --- Comment #2 from Michael Cullen --- I've also commented on https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999 Michael Cullen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mich...@cullen-online.com --- Comment #4 from Michael Cullen --- *Unofficial comments - I too am waiting for a sponsor * Minor, mostly personal choice point first: you don't need the "sum" global - just include the summary in the header as usual and then use %{summary} where you need it. Though having said that, the python sample spec file does it your way. I just like keeping extra macros to a minimum. The Group tag is not needed [1] Ideally the description would be a little bit more than just the summary rpmlint is clean, which is good license looks fine [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1333204] New: Review Request: gap-pkg-utils - Utility functions for GAP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333204 Bug ID: 1333204 Summary: Review Request: gap-pkg-utils - Utility functions for GAP Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-utils/gap-pkg-utils.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-utils/gap-pkg-utils-0.40-1.fc25.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: This GAP package provides a collection of utility functions gleaned from many packages. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332344] Review Request: phototonic - Image viewer and organizer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332344 Mukundan Ragavan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||nonamed...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nonamed...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1223887] Review Request: atomicapp - Reference implementation of the Nulecule container application Specification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223887 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- atomicapp-0.4.5-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1307228] Review Request: dynafed- The Dynamic Federations system allows to expose via HTTP and WebDAV a very fast dynamic name space
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307228 --- Comment #9 from Adrien Devresse --- Hi Andrea, Thx for the update: Build rawhide : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922533 PASSED build epel7 : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922570 PASSED build epel6 : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922678 PASSED build fedora 24 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922953 PASSED MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1] dynafed.src: E: description-line-too-long C The Dynafed project provides a dynamic, scalable HTTP resource federation mechanism for distributed storage systems. dynafed.src: E: description-line-too-long C The default deployment style is accessible by any HTTP/Webdav compatible client. The core components can be used to design frontends based on other protocols. dynafed.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed.src:37: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 37, tab: line 17) dynafed.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://grid-deployment.web.cern.ch/grid-deployment/dms/lcgutil/tar/dynafed/dynafed-1.2.0.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found dynafed.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The Dynafed project provides a dynamic, scalable HTTP resource federation mechanism for distributed storage systems. dynafed.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The default deployment style is accessible by any HTTP/Webdav compatible client. The core components can be used to design frontends based on other protocols. dynafed.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/libugrconnector.so.1.2.0 dynafed.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libugrconnector.so.1.2.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 dynafed.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/ugr-server dynafed.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/dynafed-1.2.0/RELEASE-NOTES dynafed.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /etc/ugr/conf.d/ugrauth_example.py 644 /usr/bin/python dynafed.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig dynafed-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C dmlite plugin for dynafed dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/ugr/libugrdmlite.so dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: no-documentation d ynafed-dmlite-plugin.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C dmlite plugin for dynafed dynafed-dmlite-plugin.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed-dmlite-plugin.x86_64: W: no-documentation dynafed-http-plugin.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed-http-plugin.x86_64: W: no-documentation dynafed-lfc-plugin.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed-lfc-plugin.x86_64: W: no-documentation dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on dynafed-private/dynafed-private-libs/libdynafed-private dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 23 warnings. OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] . OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines . OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. -> Apache 2.0 OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [3] N/A: 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 %license.[4] OK: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] FAIL: 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. http://grid-deployment.web.cern.ch/grid-deployment/dms/lcgutil/tar/dynafed/dynafed-1.2.0.tar.gz -> No File OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [7] -> compile for all N/A: 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 ExcludeA
[Bug 1307228] Review Request: dynafed- The Dynamic Federations system allows to expose via HTTP and WebDAV a very fast dynamic name space
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307228 Adrien Devresse changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1329848] Review Request: erlang-parse_trans - Parse transform utilities for Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329848 --- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov --- Thanks, Randy! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1283296] Review Request: pam-u2f - PAM authentication over U2F
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283296 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:54:23 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1283296] Review Request: pam-u2f - PAM authentication over U2F
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283296 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- pam-u2f-1.0.3-5.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328390] Review Request: infinipath-psm - Intel Performance Scaled Messaging (PSM) Libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:54:02 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1316186] Review Request: python-librosa - a python package for music and audio analysis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316186 --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System --- python-librosa-0.4.2-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1316186] Review Request: python-librosa - a python package for music and audio analysis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316186 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:54:09 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328390] Review Request: infinipath-psm - Intel Performance Scaled Messaging (PSM) Libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- infinipath-psm-3.3-22_g4abbc60_open.2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1319289] Review Request: rubygem-review - Flexible document format/conversion system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319289 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- rubygem-review-1.7.2-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1319289] Review Request: rubygem-review - Flexible document format/conversion system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319289 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:52:51 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1329848] Review Request: erlang-parse_trans - Parse transform utilities for Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329848 Randy Barlow changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Randy Barlow --- It looks like most of the source files are the Erlang Public License, and one of them is ASL 2.0. Can you update the license to say EPL 1.1 and ASL 2.0? I'm going to pass it, but make sure you update the license text to be correct. Nice work! Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed = 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]: 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 %license. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 13 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/rbarlow/review/1329848-erlang- parse_trans/licensecheck.txt rbarlow: Make sure to put "EPL 1.1 and ASL 2.0" as the license. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 81920 bytes in 28 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local = SHOULD items = Generic: [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. rbarlow: I'd suggest requesting a license file from upstream. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [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]: Packager,
[Bug 1329848] Review Request: erlang-parse_trans - Parse transform utilities for Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329848 Randy Barlow changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rbar...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 537366] Review Request: cgal-python - Python bindings for the CGAL library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537366 Laurent Rineau changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(pro...@gmail.com) |needinfo- -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1307134] Review Request: mkdocs-alabaster - Alabaster port for MkDocs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307134 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- mkdocs-alabaster-0.7.1-1.fc24, mkdocs-basic-theme-1.0.1-3.fc24, mkdocs-cinder-0.9.3-1.fc24, mkdocs-material-0.2.2-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-988ac47c35 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332605] Review Request: gap-pkg-openmath - Import and export of OpenMath objects for GAP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332605 Till Hofmann changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Till Hofmann --- (In reply to Jerry James from comment #2) > (In reply to Till Hofmann from comment #1) > > - Why do you have some documentation in /usr/lib/gap/pkg/openmath/doc and > > some in /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-openmath/? Does gap expect documentation in > > /usr/lib/gap/? Why not put everything in /usr/share/doc? > > Yes, gap has an online documentation browser, which expects to find > documentation alongside the actual code (actually, wherever PackageInfo.g > says the documentation is located). The files in /usr/share/doc are those > that the online documentation browser would not look for. > That makes sense, so this is okay. > > rpmlint: > > gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > > /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-openmath/GPL > > --> This should be reported upstream. > > Okay, I will do so. Thank you for the review! Thanks for packaging! Approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332206] Review Request: python-pysocks - A Python SOCKS client module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332206 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- python-pysocks-1.5.6-2.fc24, python-requests-2.10.0-1.fc24, python-urllib3-1.15.1-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-5fd6be4390 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1307149] Review Request: mkdocs-material - A material design theme for MkDocs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307149 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- mkdocs-alabaster-0.7.1-1.fc24, mkdocs-basic-theme-1.0.1-3.fc24, mkdocs-cinder-0.9.3-1.fc24, mkdocs-material-0.2.2-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-988ac47c35 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1307132] Review Request: mkdocs-cinder - A clean responsive theme for the MkDocs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307132 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- mkdocs-alabaster-0.7.1-1.fc24, mkdocs-basic-theme-1.0.1-3.fc24, mkdocs-cinder-0.9.3-1.fc24, mkdocs-material-0.2.2-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-988ac47c35 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999 --- Comment #3 from Lukas Brabec --- I initially included python3 but I found that `python3 setup.py test` fails in several testcases. I decided not to include python3 until the testsuite passes without failures or errors. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332605] Review Request: gap-pkg-openmath - Import and export of OpenMath objects for GAP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332605 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Jerry James --- (In reply to Till Hofmann from comment #1) > - Why do you have some documentation in /usr/lib/gap/pkg/openmath/doc and > some in /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-openmath/? Does gap expect documentation in > /usr/lib/gap/? Why not put everything in /usr/share/doc? Yes, gap has an online documentation browser, which expects to find documentation alongside the actual code (actually, wherever PackageInfo.g says the documentation is located). The files in /usr/share/doc are those that the online documentation browser would not look for. > - The source files don't have a valid copying permission statement (i.e. a > statement saying 'This file is licensed under GPLv2+') which is not perfect > but not a blocker. I'm afraid that the gap community in general is a little bit sloppy about license notifications, although there are a handful of gap package authors who understand the issues involved and are careful about license statements. > rpmlint: > gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-openmath/GPL > --> This should be reported upstream. Okay, I will do so. Thank you for the review! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999 Stanislav Ochotnicky changed: What|Removed |Added CC||socho...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Stanislav Ochotnicky --- The package looks good to me generally - pretty small/clean. Why no Python 3 though? It seems to build fine -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999 Lukas Brabec changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) --- Comment #1 from Lukas Brabec --- This is my first package, so I need sponsor. We need this package for Taskotron [1], to parse XML output of pytest and unittest. [1] https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/ Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332999] New: Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999 Bug ID: 1332999 Summary: Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: lbra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://lbrabec.fedorapeople.org/python-xunitparser.spec SRPM URL: https://lbrabec.fedorapeople.org/python-xunitparser-1.3.3-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects Fedora Account System Username: lbrabec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1327781] Review Request: golang-github-olivere-elastic - Elasticsearch client for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327781 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-olivere-elastic -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1327762] Review Request: golang-github-Shopify-sarama - Sarama is a Go library for Apache Kafka 0.8 and 0.9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327762 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-Shopify-sarama -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1327753] Review Request: golang-github-Shopify-toxiproxy - A proxy to simulate network and system conditions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327753 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-Shopify-toxiproxy -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1327307] Review Request: golang-github-eapache-go-resiliency - Resiliency patterns for golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327307 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-eapache-go-resiliency -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1329448] Review Request: Tbootxm - trusted host with boot time integrity checks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329448 Neil Horman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nhor...@redhat.com, ||saurabh.kulka...@intel.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nhor...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(saurabh.kulkarni@ ||intel.com) --- Comment #2 from Neil Horman --- yeah, saurabh, please read over the Fedora package review process before opening a bugzilla: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1327291] Review Request: golang-github-mistifyio-go-zfs - Go wrappers for ZFS commands
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327291 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-mistifyio-go-zfs -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1329844] Review Request: erlang-clique - CLI Framework for Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329844 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- erlang-clique-0.3.5-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-c4fa6fa7e5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1264715] Review Request: flacon - Audio File Encoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264715 --- Comment #7 from Jiri Eischmann --- Created attachment 1153833 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1153833&action=edit appstream metadata file -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1264715] Review Request: flacon - Audio File Encoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264715 --- Comment #6 from Jiri Eischmann --- I think you don't need to own the directories reported by fedora-review. So only unsolved problems is the reported missing dependency (libfishsound) and missing appdata file. I've created one for you (see the attachment). Since it's not shipped by upstream (you should definitely propose it there) the best way is to include in the spec file. See e.g. the spec file of Inkscape package how to do it. See the linked guidelines above to learn how to install and verify an appdata file. Also the license should probably be LGPL-2.1. That's also what the upstream RPM spec file says. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1327254] Review Request: golang-github-eapache-queue - Fast golang queue using ring-buffer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327254 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-eapache-queue -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1328041] Review Request: musicqueue - Music orgainizer and player based on a fork of Guayadeque
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328041 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/musicqueue -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1329844] Review Request: erlang-clique - CLI Framework for Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329844 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- erlang-clique-0.3.5-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-bd582cc12c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1329844] Review Request: erlang-clique - CLI Framework for Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329844 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1264715] Review Request: flacon - Audio File Encoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264715 --- Comment #5 from Jiri Eischmann --- I was finally able to run fedora-review on the package: Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed = MUST items = C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/eischmann/1264715-flacon/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32, /usr/share/icons/hicolor [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. Missing libfishsound [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in flacon [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in flacon [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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 %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local = SHOULD items = Generic: [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]: Final provides and requires are
[Bug 1332605] Review Request: gap-pkg-openmath - Import and export of OpenMath objects for GAP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332605 --- Comment #1 from Till Hofmann --- Some issues/remarks: - Why do you have some documentation in /usr/lib/gap/pkg/openmath/doc and some in /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-openmath/? Does gap expect documentation in /usr/lib/gap/? Why not put everything in /usr/share/doc? - The source files don't have a valid copying permission statement (i.e. a statement saying 'This file is licensed under GPLv2+') which is not perfect but not a blocker. rpmlint: gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-openmath/GPL --> This should be reported upstream. gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib --> OK. Other than that, the package looks good. Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed = 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 16 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/till/fedora-review/1332605-gap-pkg-openmath/licensecheck.txt Remark: The source files don't have a valid copying permission statement (i.e. a statement saying 'This file is licensed under GPLv2+') which is not perfect but not a blocker. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 3 files. [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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 %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local = SHOULD items = Generic: [-]: 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]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: 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
[Bug 1308985] Review Request: vulkan - Vulkan loader and validation layers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308985 jan p. springer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||j...@igroup.org --- Comment #12 from jan p. springer --- any chance the lunarg tools from the sdk could be included? % ls -1 lunarg-vulkan-sdk/1.0.11.0/x86_64/bin glslangValidator spirv-as spirv-dis spirv-remap vkjson_info vkreplay vktrace vulkaninfo -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1332206] Review Request: python-pysocks - A Python SOCKS client module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332206 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- python-pysocks-1.5.6-2.fc23, python-requests-2.10.0-1.fc23, python-urllib3-1.15.1-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b9b61b26d3 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org