[Bug 1376867] Review Request: python3-pycurl - Python interface to libcurl for Python 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376867



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
python3-pycurl-7.43.0-5.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2016-e930eac29e

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394502] Review Request: daq - Data Acquisition Library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394502



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
daq-2.0.6-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2016-aa3ba5ce3e

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376035] Review Request: modulemd - Module metadata manipulation library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376035

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
modulemd-1.0.2-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2016-7bf4bd5611

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394502] Review Request: daq - Data Acquisition Library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394502

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
daq-2.0.6-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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-EPEL-2016-6fefc97dbe

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376867] Review Request: python3-pycurl - Python interface to libcurl for Python 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376867

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
python3-pycurl-7.43.0-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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-EPEL-2016-409af75f59

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1187084] Review Request: electrum - a lightweight Bitcoin client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187084



--- Comment #32 from Samuel Gyger  ---
@Jonny Heggheim:
Thank you for taking over and making this happen so fast. Appreciate this.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1155793] Review Request: hyperrogue - An SDL roguelike in a non-euclidean world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155793

Ben Rosser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|i...@cicku.me  |rosser@gmail.com
  Flags|needinfo?(i...@cicku.me)   |



--- Comment #25 from Ben Rosser  ---
Taken this review.

I ran through the spec and only found one issue: there are bundled copies of
mtrand and glew in the sources; from licensecheck:

BSD (2 clause)
--
hyperrogue-83j/src/glew.c
hyperrogue-83j/src/mtrand.h

It doesn't seem like glew.c is used in the Linux build. If that's the case you
should probably explicitly remove it in %prep (so this can be verified),
although this isn't a requirement.

But mtrand definitely seems to be, which means you should modify the License
tag accordingly to reflect that (License: GPLv2 and BSD) and explain why in a
comment.

As per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Bundling_and_Duplication_of_system_libraries
you should probably also add a "Provides: bundled(mtrand)" to the spec.

Otherwise the package looks good.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376149] Review Request: fedora-obsolete-packages - A package to obsolete retired packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376149



--- Comment #11 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
It'd help if you imported the SRPM into the repository, even without building.

So what about F24 → F25 transition? Did nothing get retired?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395955] Review Request: fatresize - FAT16/FAT32 resizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395955



--- Comment #6 from Michal Ambroz  ---
Sorry one more update - switching to the new upstream git on github

Here it is:
SPEC URL: http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/fatresize.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/fatresize-1.0.3-4.git20161118.fc24.src.rpm

Best regards
Michal Ambroz

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1390595] Review Request: librdkafka - The Apache Kafka C Library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1390595

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||piotr1...@gmail.com



--- Comment #1 from Piotr Popieluch  ---
I'm interested in having librdkafka in Fedora and EPEL. I'm no sponsor so I
can't sponsor you, but I can help you with this package.

When doing a review, the reviewers use fedora-review -b which automates some
tasks. F-R downloads the files from the urls in the bugreport, builds the
packge and runs some tests. Please make sure "fedora-review -b 1390595" builds
correctly. rpmlint might be helpful too.

To become sponsored, you will have to do a couple unofficial reviews to show
you understand the package guidelines [1]. You can post the urls to those
reviews here.

Some comments: 
version/release needs to be defined in the uploaded specfile.
Group tag is deprecated, remove it unless you still want to support EL5 (which
will EOL soon).
License tag must match the short license as listed in [2]
Source needs to specify the upstream source url. [3]
BuildRoot tag is deprecated (unless EL5 support)
description needs to be wrapped at 80 chars
requires for rhel >=7 is openssl-libs, I would expect this to be the same for
Fedora (didn't check)
%clean is deprecated
don't rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install
%build you will probably want to define CFLAGS='%{optflags} to have all default
options and hardening.
%doc, put license files in %license, not %doc.
Why is the permission set to 444 in %files?


[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376149] Review Request: fedora-obsolete-packages - A package to obsolete retired packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376149

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ngomp...@gmail.com



--- Comment #10 from Neal Gompa  ---
Fufufufu!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1389971] Review Request: Elemental - distributed-memory dense and sparse-direct linear algebra and optimizatio

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389971



--- Comment #11 from Ryan H. Lewis (rhl)  ---
I believe the latest spec should work.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1187084] Review Request: electrum - a lightweight Bitcoin client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187084



--- Comment #31 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/electrum

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394250] Review Request: python-async-timeout - asyncio-compatible timeout context manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394250



--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-async-timeout

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1187084] Review Request: electrum - a lightweight Bitcoin client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187084



--- Comment #30 from Jonny Heggheim  ---
Have not heard anything from upstream, I updated the license to MIT and BSD.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376149] Review Request: fedora-obsolete-packages - A package to obsolete retired packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376149



--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Do it!  Do it!  Hail Discordia!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376149] Review Request: fedora-obsolete-packages - A package to obsolete retired packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376149



--- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts  ---
Well, there's not much point in building the package until there's actually an
obsolete to add to it.  I can drop a build in rawhide, though, if people really
want a completely empty package for whatever reason.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394267] Review Request: perl-NNTPClient - Perl 5 module to talk to NNTP (RFC977) server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394267

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-NNTPClient-0.37-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-4f6c0fa947

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394151] Review Request: perl-Mail-JMAPTalk - Perl client for JMAP protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394151

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc25, perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc25 has been
pushed to the Fedora 25 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-ce08d48f91

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394146] Review Request: perl-Convert-Base64 - Encoding and decoding of Base64 strings

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394146

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc25, perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc25 has been
pushed to the Fedora 25 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-ce08d48f91

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395554] Review Request: python-astral - Calculations for the position of the sun and moon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395554



--- Comment #6 from Athos Ribeiro  ---
Thank you, spot.

Ok Fabian, let me know here as soon as they add the License text to the package
so we can proceed with this.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376149] Review Request: fedora-obsolete-packages - A package to obsolete retired packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376149

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl



--- Comment #7 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
This hasn't been built yet. Any plans to put Obsolete specific packages using
this mechanism?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1201176] Review Request: python-pygatt - A Python Module for Bluetooth LE Generic Attribute Profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1201176



--- Comment #7 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
No need to define %sum, just fill in the first Summary, and then use %summary
in subsequent ones.

Requries: bluez should apply to both subpackages, no?

The tarball contains some pdf files which don't look like they're
redistributable. You'll have to provide a sanitized tarball without them.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396636] New: Review Request: golang-github-knieriem-markdown - A translation of peg-markdown into Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396636

Bug ID: 1396636
   Summary: Review Request: golang-github-knieriem-markdown - A
translation of peg-markdown into Go
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rosser@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/golang-github-knieriem-markdown.spec
SRPM URL:
https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/dwarffortress/golang-github-knieriem-markdown-0-1.git325ec6c.fc24.src.rpm

Description: This is an implementation of John Gruber's markdown in Go.
It is a translation of peg-markdown, written by John MacFarlane
in C, into Go. It is using a modified version of Andrew J
Snodgrass' PEG parser peg -- now supporting LEG grammars --,
which itself is based on the parser used by peg-markdown.

Support for HTML and groff mm output is implemented, but
LaTeX output has not been ported. The output is identical
to that of peg-markdown.

Fedora Account System Username: tc01

This is my first Go package-- I was looking into packaging an application
written in Go with this as a dependency. As best as I can tell, the current way
to do Go packaging in Fedora is to use the gofed tool to generate a spec and
then polish it manually? That's what I've done here.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1393796] Review Request: golang-github-go-errors-error - Package errors provides errors that have stack-traces

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1393796

Dennis Chen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #3 from Dennis Chen  ---
Ok. We can get rid of the ExclusiveArch, and then remove some unnecessary
lines/comments:

%if 0%{?with_check} && ! 0%{?with_bundled}
%endif

%if 0%{?with_check}
#Here comes all BuildRequires: PACKAGE the unit tests
#in %%check section need for running
%endif

etc... And then I think we're good to go.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1321013] Review request: gnome-shell-extension-taskbar - GNOME Shell Extension TaskBar

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321013



--- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Package looks all right, no issues here. But to become a maintainer, so more
work would be needed (reviews of other packages). Let me know if you want to do
it.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394250] Review Request: python-async-timeout - asyncio-compatible timeout context manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394250

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #8 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
+ package name is OK ;)
+ license is acceptable (ASL 2.0)
+ license is specified correctly
+ builds and install OK
+ fedora-review is happy
+ provides/requires seem correct
+ python packaging macros are used
+ %python_provide is present
+ latest version

Package is 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1359402] Review Request: coot - crystallographic macromolecular building toolkit (unretire request )

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359402

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Whiteboard|NotReady BuildFails |



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1359402] Review Request: coot - crystallographic macromolecular building toolkit (unretire request )

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359402



--- Comment #27 from Antonio Trande  ---
Created attachment 1221971
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1221971=edit
review log

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===

- > sed -i -e 's! -shared ! -Wl,--as-needed\0!g' libtool <-

This commands does not work.
Try to set LDFLAGS="$RPM_LD_FLAGS -Wl,--as-needed"

- undefined-non-weak-symbol warnings appears on rawhide only; something is
changed in new release
(see rpmlint output). Please ask to upstream.

Review log attached because too long.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394962] Review Request: clevis - Automated decryption framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394962



--- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/clevis

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394962] Review Request: clevis - Automated decryption framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394962

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #14 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated

= 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.
GPLv3+

[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or
 generated". 9 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /var/tmp/1394962-clevis/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
Yes, all packages transitively depend on clevis.rpm which has the license.

[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/60clevis
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners:
 /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/60clevis
Please add %dir /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/60clevis to %files.

[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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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 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]: Package uses hardened build flags if required to.
 Note: suid files: clevis-luks-udisks2
[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]: 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]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in 

[Bug 1394962] Review Request: clevis - Automated decryption framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394962

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1391444] Review Request: boost159 - The free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1391444



--- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts  ---
Just a note:

It's not required to open review requests for different versions of packages
already in the distribution, though of course you can do so if you wish.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Review_Purpose
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_Process

But please, follow the guidelines for naming such packages.  There is no
version "159" of boost as far as I know; if the version is "1.59" then this
package should be named "boost1.59".

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming#Multiple_packages_with_the_same_base_name

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396232] Review Request: libkeepalive - Enable TCP keepalive in dynamic binaries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396232

Igor Gnatenko  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ignate...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
* CFLAGS/LDFLAGS are not used
  export CFLAGS="%{optflags}"
  export LDFLAGS="%{__global_ldflags}"
  but it still requires some patching of Makefile `=` -> `?=`
* Missing BuildRequires: gcc
* You should try to version library (though I'm not sure how much it matters
here, probably doesn't at all)
* echo is not needed in %build
* instead of make you should use %make_build (e.g. %make_build -C src)
* there are some tests, so try to build / run them
* instead of doing mkdir, you can pass `-D` to install

Apart from that, looks good ;)

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1392917] Review Request: libvdpau-va-gl - VDPAU driver with OpenGL/ VAAPI back-end

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1392917

Igor Gnatenko  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
* Missing BuildRequires: gcc-c++
* Missing BuildRequires: make
* would be nice to add `-print` to find invocation to see what actually it
deletes (actually it doesn't delete anything, so can be dropped)
* why do you exclude unversioned .so?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1392917] Review Request: libvdpau-va-gl - VDPAU driver with OpenGL/ VAAPI back-end

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1392917

Igor Gnatenko  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ignate...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
link to spec gives 404. proper link is:
http://dl.kwizart.net/review/libvdpau-va-gl.spec

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1375765] Review Request: yosys - Yosys Open SYnthesis Suite, including Verilog synthesizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375765

Randy Barlow  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review+  |fedora-review?



--- Comment #8 from Randy Barlow  ---
Whoops, I hadn't meant to mark this approved just yet.

BTW, my comment about the large data is /usr/share is also at your option.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1375765] Review Request: yosys - Yosys Open SYnthesis Suite, including Verilog synthesizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375765



--- Comment #7 from Randy Barlow  ---
(In reply to Randy Barlow from comment #6)
> It doesn't make sense for the file to be executable so I think the current
> state is better. If you want to silence rpmlint, you can drop the
> #!/usr/bin/python3 from the top of the source file so rpmlint doesn't think
> it's a script. It isn't a script anyway, so that line really isn't necessary.

I'd also recommend sending such a patch upstream. The #! isn't needed unless
that script is meant to do something, but it's really just library code.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1375765] Review Request: yosys - Yosys Open SYnthesis Suite, including Verilog synthesizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375765

Randy Barlow  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+
   ||needinfo?(space...@gmail.co
   ||m)



--- Comment #6 from Randy Barlow  ---
(In reply to Eric Smith from comment #5)
> Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~brouhaha/yosys/yosys.spec
> SRPM URL:
> https://fedorapeople.org/~brouhaha/yosys/yosys-0.6.0-2.20160923git8f5bf6d.
> fc24.src.rpm
> 
> Note that no action was taken for the following:

Thanks for pointing these out!

> * bundled viz.js  - The file viz.js isn't bundled into the generated RPMs,
> so the bundling policy, which is based primarily on security concerns, is
> not applicable. In particular, following the bundling policy would require a
> "Provides: bundled(viz.js)=0.0.3", but that would clearly be wrong, as the
> package doesn't provide it.

I'm convinced and I agree with you now.

> * /usr/share/yosys/python3/smtio.py - Not moved. There is considerable
> precedent for application-specific Python files to be in /usr/share/%{name},
> e.g., firewalld, hplip,  qtcreator, setroubleshoot, virt-manager, etc. I've
> reviewed FHS 3.0 and am not convinced that having application-specific
> Python files in /usr/share/%{name} actually contravenes any FHS 3.0
> requirement.

I still think this *should* be moved, but due to your citations we can keep it
the way it is.

> * tarball without URL - No actual problem. Perhaps was triggered by outdated
> URL for Debian pool.

OK. FYI, the current URL is also 404, but I see the problem with the
disappearing files. I recommend working with upstream to get that man page
included there so we don't depend on Debian's man pages (and then Debian can
also get them from upstream!)

> * %check tests directory - No actual problem. Tests are present and are
> correctly tested in %check section.

OK

> These requested changes have been made:
> 
> * license tag - Changed to include additional licenses.

I read the issue you filed upstream, and it seems that some of the licenses
included in the current spec file only apply to tests and not to the
distributed package. I recommend trimming the licenses down to what is in the
distributed code, but I'm not sure whether the license field should be about
the entire source tree, or just the bits we distribute. I'll leave that
decision up to you.

> * /usr/share/yosys/python3/smtio.p - Had previously marked executable to fix
> rpmlint error. Removed the chmod, so now rpmlint reports that error. Which
> is better, having the rpmlint error, or having the file unnecessarily marked
> as executable? Since it contains no main program, I felt that having it
> marked executable was inconsequential.

It doesn't make sense for the file to be executable so I think the current
state is better. If you want to silence rpmlint, you can drop the
#!/usr/bin/python3 from the top of the source file so rpmlint doesn't think
it's a script. It isn't a script anyway, so that line really isn't necessary.

> * versioned dependency in subpackages:
>  - Subpackage doc dependency on main package *removed*, as docs can stand
> alone.
>  - Subpackage devel dependency on main package made arch-specific.
> * /usr/share/yosys is architecture-independent:
>  - Moved /usr/share/yosys to noarch subpackage.
>  - Main package made dependent on -share subpackage.

The share subpackage is nice! There's a new message from fedora-review with the
current spec that says that there is a large amount of data (3143680 bytes) in
/usr/share, and it suggests moving that data to a noarch subpackage. Since you
now have a -share package, perhaps that would be a nice improvement.

One other message from fedora-review that you might consider fixing - it says
that gawk isn't needed in BuildRequires. You can change that or not at your
option.

There is one thing you do need to fix for sure:

[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/doc/yosys
 randy: You can probably change the doc files section to just have
%{_docdir}/%{name}

Once you have that directory ownership fixed let me know!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395804] Review Request: python-batinfo - A Python module to retrieve battery information

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395804



--- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter  ---
Thanks for your feedback.

(In reply to Iryna Shcherbina from comment #1)
> * there is a new version of the package 0.4.2, which was released just
> yesterday

Yes, I know. I worked with upstream to get a couple of issues sorted out.
Shebang, license, and typos.

> * with the new release the license file is included in the tar, so please
> include it in %license

That was one issue.

> * please use %{srcname} macro in the URL

No, this adds no real value and make the URL very copy-&-paste unfriendly in
the spec file. I know that this is shown in the guidelines. If the project is
renamed or the orga changed then the URL needs to be modified anyways.

Updated files:
Spec URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-batinfo.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-batinfo-0.4.2-1.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395589] Review Request: lecm - Let's Encrypt Certificate Manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395589



--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/lecm

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394962] Review Request: clevis - Automated decryption framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394962

Nathaniel McCallum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On|1396262 |



--- Comment #13 from Nathaniel McCallum  ---
SPEC:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/npmccallum/clevis/clevis.git/plain/clevis.spec
SRPM:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/npmccallum/clevis/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00478613-clevis/clevis-2-1.fc26.src.rpm

This includes the new upstream release (v2) which works around the GCC code
generation issue. It also runs "clevis decrypt" as root, so the key is
protected (though running network code as root is somewhat less than ideal;
this can be addressed in future releases).


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396262
[Bug 1396262] Aggressive optimization of zeroing results in incorrect
behavior
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1389971] Review Request: Elemental - distributed-memory dense and sparse-direct linear algebra and optimizatio

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389971



--- Comment #10 from Ryan H. Lewis (rhl)  ---
Upstream reported that SimpleSVD had a bug, and was redundant so it was
removed. I am seeing that the tests are timing out/failing to find libEl.so.0
This is some sort of LD_LIBRARY_PATH issue. I am looking into it now.

I've tried to move that path as well.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395273] Review Request: python-wcsaxes - A framework for plotting astronomical and geospatial data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395273



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-wcsaxes-0.9-3.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8b93ef0700

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395273] Review Request: python-wcsaxes - A framework for plotting astronomical and geospatial data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395273

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395273] Review Request: python-wcsaxes - A framework for plotting astronomical and geospatial data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395273



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-wcsaxes-0.9-3.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-884992496e

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394240] Review Request: perl-XML-Fast - Simple and very fast XML to hash conversion

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394240



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-XML-Fast-0.11-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-84113c90c6

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395589] Review Request: lecm - Let's Encrypt Certificate Manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395589

Haïkel Guémar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Haïkel Guémar  ---
For the next release, fix the tarball to include LICENSE file and add it in the
package.

I hereby approve this package, please submit a pkgdb request to include it

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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/haikel/1395589-lecm/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/cron.d
[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.
[]: 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 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: No rpmlint messages.
[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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= 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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[-]: 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]: 

[Bug 1396139] Review Request: libmad - MPEG audio decoder library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396139



--- Comment #6 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  ---
Spec URL: http://dl.kwizart.net/review/libmad.spec
SRPM URL: http://dl.kwizart.net/review/libmad-0.15.1b-18.fc26.src.rpm
Description: MPEG audio decoder library

Changelog:
- fixed verbose autoreconf
- Add pkgconfig only for el5

Scratch build with el6:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16511746
There pkgconfig is automatically added as requires indeed, but not for el5.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395804] Review Request: python-batinfo - A Python module to retrieve battery information

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395804

Iryna Shcherbina  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ishch...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Iryna Shcherbina  ---
Hello Fabian,

the spec file looks good, but I have a couple of comments:

* there is a new version of the package 0.4.2, which was released just
yesterday

* with the new release the license file is included in the tar, so please
include it in %license

* please use %{srcname} macro in the URL

It is an informal review, as I'm not sponsored yet, but I can continue with the
review when I am and when the updates are available.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395554] Review Request: python-astral - Calculations for the position of the sun and moon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395554



--- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter  ---
Thanks for the feedback, Tom.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395554] Review Request: python-astral - Calculations for the position of the sun and moon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395554

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tcall...@redhat.com
 Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal)   |



--- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
Google Maps API restrictions do not impose additional copyright/license
restrictions on the implementation in python-astral. Lifting FE-Legal.


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235
[Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394267] Review Request: perl-NNTPClient - Perl 5 module to talk to NNTP (RFC977) server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394267



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-NNTPClient-0.37-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-eac4ab186a

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394267] Review Request: perl-NNTPClient - Perl 5 module to talk to NNTP (RFC977) server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394267



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-NNTPClient-0.37-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-4f6c0fa947

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396513] New: Review Request: nitrokey-app - Nitrokey's Application

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396513

Bug ID: 1396513
   Summary: Review Request: nitrokey-app - Nitrokey's Application
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: ignate...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/nitrokey-app.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/nitrokey-app-0.5.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Nitrokey's Application.
Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394267] Review Request: perl-NNTPClient - Perl 5 module to talk to NNTP (RFC977) server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394267

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-NNTPClient-0.37-1.fc26



--- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396492] Review Request: pdfbox1 - Java library for working with PDF documents

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396492

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1340387




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340387
[Bug 1340387] CVE-2016-4434 tika: XML External Entity vulnerability
[fedora-all]
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396492] Review Request: pdfbox1 - Java library for working with PDF documents

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396492

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396492] New: Review Request: pdfbox1 - Java library for working with PDF documents

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396492

Bug ID: 1396492
   Summary: Review Request: pdfbox1 - Java library for working
with PDF documents
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: punto...@libero.it
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/pdfbox1.spec
SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/pdfbox1-1.8.12-1.fc24.src.rpm
Description:
Apache PDFBox is an open source Java PDF library for working with PDF
documents. This project allows creation of new PDF documents, manipulation of
existing documents and the ability to extract content from documents. Apache
PDFBox also includes several command line utilities. Apache PDFBox is
published under the Apache License v2.0.
Fedora Account System Username: gil

Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16511041

Used by Apache Tika >= 1.13

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394267] Review Request: perl-NNTPClient - Perl 5 module to talk to NNTP (RFC977) server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394267



--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-NNTPClient

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395589] Review Request: lecm - Let's Encrypt Certificate Manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395589

Haïkel Guémar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||karlthe...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|karlthe...@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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396478] Review Request: daala - Daala video compression

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396478

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request:  -|



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396478] Review Request: - < short summary here>

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396478

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sspre...@redhat.com



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396406] Review Request: libebur128 - A library that implements the EBU R 128 standard for loudness normalization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396406

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396478] New: Review Request: - < short summary here>

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396478

Bug ID: 1396478
   Summary: Review Request:  - 
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: negativ...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/negativo17/daala/master/daala.spec
SRPM URL:
https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/daala-0-1.20161114git4403315.fc25.src.rpm
Description:
A new video compression technology. The goal of the project is to provide a
video format that's free to implement, use and distribute, and a reference
implementation with technical performance superior to H.265.

Fedora Account System Username: slaanesh

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396139] Review Request: libmad - MPEG audio decoder library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396139



--- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa  ---
Well, I'll trust your judgement on the FPM option. You can leave it as is.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1290342] Review Request: ecc-25519-java - Java library to use Ed25519 and Curve25518

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290342

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|kwiz...@gmail.com   |nob...@fedoraproject.org
  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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395589] Review Request: lecm - Let's Encrypt Certificate Manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395589



--- Comment #1 from Yanis Guenane  ---
Spec URL: https://pub.yanisguenane.fr/fedora/packaging/lecm/lecm.spec
SRPM URL:
https://pub.yanisguenane.fr/fedora/packaging/lecm/lecm-0.0.7-1.fc25.src.rpm
Koji build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16509893

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1290342] Review Request: ecc-25519-java - Java library to use Ed25519 and Curve25518

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290342



--- Comment #16 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  ---
Just to be clear on rpmdev-newspec, I'm not saying that you must use it.
You can adapt your current tools to use this scheme instead.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1290342] Review Request: ecc-25519-java - Java library to use Ed25519 and Curve25518

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290342



--- Comment #15 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #14)
> (In reply to Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) from comment #13)
> > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10)
> > 
> > > > - You are missing a "-" between email and package EVR in changelog. 
> > > > rpmlint
> > > > haven't found it and I don't expect it's a hard requirement. But at 
> > > > least
> > > > that the format used by the rpmdev-bumpspec tool
> > > 
> > > I dont want use "-" in my spec file, and i am not interested to use that 
> > > tool
> > 
> > It's a weird answer. I wouldn't have expected it.
> > The problem is that other maintainers and provenpackager will use theses
> > tools, or even use parser that may break if the "-" isn't found.
> > Above all it's improving readability. 
> 
> NOT is a problem, this is because the people you've indicated you have no
> problems to make changes in my spec files. and I repeat I am not interested
> just about aesthetics without any functionality

I'm afraid you don't consider readability as the feature. There is something
weird reading most of your spec changelogs. It makes eyes bleeding because
something is missing, until one discover what it is.

> > > > - What the point to use /usr/bin/perl over perl (as package) directly ? 
> > > > or
> > > > at least the appropriate macro ?
> > > 
> > > I need only the binary for change the build scripts ...
> > okay, but %{_bindir} should be used here why not using the macro ?
> > Also I don't think perl packaging will change it's packaging scheme not to
> > have the perl binary in the main perl package.
> Done
> > That been said, I would use sed (that is in the default buildroot) instead
> > to avoid a dependency on perl (that is no more in the default buildroot).

> Not in my spec file, unless it is forbidden to use in some guideline
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Build_Root_Without_Perl
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Scripting_inside_of_spec_files

Given that perl isn't in the default buildroot anymore, it will simplify the
dependency graph.

If you can show me a rationale argument for both issues, I'm okay to approve
the package. Alternative is that I will resign from review and you will find a
new reviewer.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1389971] Review Request: Elemental - distributed-memory dense and sparse-direct linear algebra and optimizatio

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389971



--- Comment #9 from Antonio Trande  ---
(In reply to Ryan H. Lewis (rhl) from comment #8)
> can you explain how the ctest in %check would work for each of the two MPI
> variants, and on the _installed_ binaries or on the compiled but not
> installed ones?

Your latest SPEC files is good:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/rhl/elemental/elemental.git/tree/elemental.spec?id=9e5397b387a7171c08d4c7f5d9f0af23e5adf742

We need to know why 'Examples/lapack_like/SimpleSVD' is failing, it looks like
that it's faulted.


'%{_prefix}/%{_sysconfdir}/elemental/CMake/*' path is wrong to me; usually,
CMake files go under a private directory of '%{_libdir}/cmake' like
'%{_libdir}/cmake/elemental'.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1028743] Review Request: hans - IP over ICMP tunneling solution

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028743



--- Comment #6 from Michal Ambroz  ---
One more bit - the LICENSE should go to separate %license tag.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395955] Review Request: fatresize - FAT16/FAT32 resizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395955



--- Comment #5 from Michal Ambroz  ---
Sorry one more update - I forgot the %license .

Here it is:
SPEC URL: http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/fatresize.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/fatresize-1.0.3-3.git20100729.fc24.src.rpm

Best regards
Michal Ambroz

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1346407] Review Request: stress-ng - Stress test a computer system in various ways

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1346407

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1346407] Review Request: stress-ng - Stress test a computer system in various ways

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1346407

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo-   |



--- Comment #8 from Simone Caronni  ---
Can you please replace the build and install section with this?

%install
install -p -m 755 -D %{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{name}
install -p -m 644 -D %{name}.1 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1

%files
%license COPYING
%doc README
%{_bindir}/%{name}
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.*

If you execute make install you need to remove (patch/sed) the additional
CFLAGS from the Makefile and re-export the same CFLAGS in the install section
or the target is different and things get relinked.

Man page can be installed uncompressed as RPM at assemble time compresses those
before packing the RPM.

With the above changes, the package builds fine on all rawhide architectures
without another build taking place in the install section.

Also, version 0.07.05 has come out, please update :)

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1346407] Review Request: stress-ng - Stress test a computer system in various ways

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1346407

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(negativo17@gmail. |needinfo-
   |com)|



--- Comment #7 from Simone Caronni  ---
All good with the changes, I'm looking at why the build fails if you don't
relink binaries again with ppc and aarch architectures.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396139] Review Request: libmad - MPEG audio decoder library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396139



--- Comment #4 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  ---
(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #3)
> %if 0%{__isa_bits} == 64 or smth like this..
It's already using that, but the Neal concern is that 64Bit would be Intel
specific.

@Neal
Looking at the code, I don't read that, looking at line 132 in fixed.h define a
non asm version of mad_f_mul. Also it's mentioned that the 64Bit FPM should
work as soon a a compiler has 64bit type. But my understanding is that it will
not perform better if not a native 64bit arch.
So using FPM=64bit seems a safe improvement over using ASM specific code on
64bit arches.

That been said, FPM=Intel is indeed x86 asm specific. I've never tested that
option.

For arm, it's defined in line 253 and is asm specific. It's also advertised as
performing better than FPM=64bit. I've only selected that option because it was
worked on recently (on the referenced bug) and I've made a runtime test that it
worked fine at the time I've bootstrapped RPM Fusion for arm. (was armv5tel and
armv7hl at that time).

Fixed the others issues locally.

@Neal, any comment on the FPM option ?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1290342] Review Request: ecc-25519-java - Java library to use Ed25519 and Curve25518

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290342



--- Comment #14 from gil cattaneo  ---
(In reply to Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) from comment #13)
> (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10)
> 
> > > - You are missing a "-" between email and package EVR in changelog. 
> > > rpmlint
> > > haven't found it and I don't expect it's a hard requirement. But at least
> > > that the format used by the rpmdev-bumpspec tool
> > 
> > I dont want use "-" in my spec file, and i am not interested to use that 
> > tool
> 
> It's a weird answer. I wouldn't have expected it.
> The problem is that other maintainers and provenpackager will use theses
> tools, or even use parser that may break if the "-" isn't found.
> Above all it's improving readability. 

NOT is a problem, this is because the people you've indicated you have no
problems to make changes in my spec files. and I repeat I am not interested
just about aesthetics without any functionality

> > > - What the point to use /usr/bin/perl over perl (as package) directly ? or
> > > at least the appropriate macro ?
> > 
> > I need only the binary for change the build scripts ...
> okay, but %{_bindir} should be used here why not using the macro ?
> Also I don't think perl packaging will change it's packaging scheme not to
> have the perl binary in the main perl package.
Done
> That been said, I would use sed (that is in the default buildroot) instead
> to avoid a dependency on perl (that is no more in the default buildroot).

Not in my spec file, unless it is forbidden to use in some guideline

Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/ecc-25519-java.spec
SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/ecc-25519-java-1.0.3-1.fc24.src.rpm

- use "%{_bindir}" macro

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1389695] Review Request: python-wcsaxes - A Python framework for plotting astronomical and geospatial data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389695

Iryna Shcherbina  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Last Closed||2016-11-18 04:41:35



--- Comment #5 from Iryna Shcherbina  ---
Hi Sergio, python-wcsaxes is already in Fedora.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1395273 ***

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1395273] Review Request: python-wcsaxes - A framework for plotting astronomical and geospatial data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395273

Iryna Shcherbina  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||sergio.pa...@gmail.com



--- Comment #10 from Iryna Shcherbina  ---
*** Bug 1389695 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396406] Review Request: libebur128 - A library that implements the EBU R 128 standard for loudness normalization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396406

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sspre...@redhat.com



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396406] Review Request: libebur128 - A library that implements the EBU R 128 standard for loudness normalization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396406

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
   ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940



--- Comment #1 from Simone Caronni  ---
This review is to un-retire the package which has been previously retired.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1251940] Review Request: libebur128 - A library implementing the EBU R128 loudness standard

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
   ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1396406



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396406] New: Review Request: libebur128 - A library that implements the EBU R 128 standard for loudness normalization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396406

Bug ID: 1396406
   Summary: Review Request: libebur128 - A library that implements
the EBU R 128 standard for loudness normalization
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: negativ...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/negativo17/libebur128/master/libebur128.spec
SRPM URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/libebur128-1.2.0-1.fc24.src.rpm
Description:
A library that implements the EBU R 128 standard for loudness normalization.

It implements M, S and I modes, loudness range measurement (EBU - TECH 3342),
true peak scanning and all sample-rates by recalculation of the filter
coefficients.

Fedora Account System Username: slaanesh

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394151] Review Request: perl-Mail-JMAPTalk - Perl client for JMAP protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394151



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc24 perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc24 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-df16f5afba

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394146] Review Request: perl-Convert-Base64 - Encoding and decoding of Base64 strings

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394146



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc24 perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc24 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-df16f5afba

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394151] Review Request: perl-Mail-JMAPTalk - Perl client for JMAP protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394151



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc24 perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc24 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-df16f5afba

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394151] Review Request: perl-Mail-JMAPTalk - Perl client for JMAP protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394151



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc25 perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc25 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ce08d48f91

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394146] Review Request: perl-Convert-Base64 - Encoding and decoding of Base64 strings

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394146

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394151] Review Request: perl-Mail-JMAPTalk - Perl client for JMAP protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394151



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc25 perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc25 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ce08d48f91

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394146] Review Request: perl-Convert-Base64 - Encoding and decoding of Base64 strings

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394146



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Convert-Base64-0.001-1.fc25 perl-Mail-JMAPTalk-0.02-1.fc25 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ce08d48f91

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1290342] Review Request: ecc-25519-java - Java library to use Ed25519 and Curve25518

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290342

Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(kwiz...@gmail.com |
   |)   |



--- Comment #13 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10)

> > - You are missing a "-" between email and package EVR in changelog. rpmlint
> > haven't found it and I don't expect it's a hard requirement. But at least
> > that the format used by the rpmdev-bumpspec tool
> 
> I dont want use "-" in my spec file, and i am not interested to use that tool

It's a weird answer. I wouldn't have expected it.
The problem is that other maintainers and provenpackager will use theses tools,
or even use parser that may break if the "-" isn't found.
Above all it's improving readability. 

> > - What the point to use /usr/bin/perl over perl (as package) directly ? or
> > at least the appropriate macro ?
> 
> I need only the binary for change the build scripts ...
okay, but %{_bindir} should be used here why not using the macro ?
Also I don't think perl packaging will change it's packaging scheme not to have
the perl binary in the main perl package.

That been said, I would use sed (that is in the default buildroot) instead to
avoid a dependency on perl (that is no more in the default buildroot).

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396331] Review Request: elfio - C++ library for reading and generating ELF files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396331

Igor Gnatenko  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
Some issues to fix, but in general looks good.

[!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
 Note: Could not download Source0:
 http://downloads.sf.net/elfio/elfio-3.2.tar.gz
 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags

elfio-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dependant ->
dependent, defendant, depend ant
elfio-devel.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/elfio-devel/ChangeLog
elfio-devel.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/elfio-devel/NEWS
elfio.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dependant -> dependent,
defendant, depend ant

Missing BuildRequires: gcc-c++

make %{?_smp_mflags} -> %make_build

you could also run some "tests" in %check. Because elfdump is compiled anyway,
just run it against, let's say %{_bindir}/make.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376035] Review Request: modulemd - Module metadata manipulation library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376035



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
modulemd-1.0.2-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-7c6969bdc6

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376035] Review Request: modulemd - Module metadata manipulation library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376035



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
modulemd-1.0.2-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-7bf4bd5611

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376035] Review Request: modulemd - Module metadata manipulation library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376035



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
modulemd-1.0.2-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-a749e2d8e4

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376035] Review Request: modulemd - Module metadata manipulation library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376035

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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376035] Review Request: modulemd - Module metadata manipulation library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376035



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
modulemd-1.0.2-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b3a627bbae

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396331] Review Request: elfio - C++ library for reading and generating ELF files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396331

Igor Gnatenko  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ignate...@redhat.com



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1396139] Review Request: libmad - MPEG audio decoder library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396139



--- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
%if 0%{__isa_bits} == 64 or smth like this..

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org