https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833154
Krzysztof Daniel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kdan...@redhat.com
Assignee
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834507
Bug ID: 834507
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834501
Bug ID: 834501
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799089
Frank Ch. Eigler changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #9 from Fr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834481
Bug ID: 834481
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834478
Bug ID: 834478
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825854
--- Comment #23 from Orcan Ogetbil ---
Thank you for the update. I did a full review on this:
! rpmlint says
zita-alsa-pcmi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US clalsadrv ->
clausal
zita-alsa-pcmi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %desc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834477
Bug ID: 834477
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=826563
Nick Bebout changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=826563
Nick Bebout changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|n...@fedoraproject.org
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834461
Bug ID: 834461
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834457
Bug ID: 834457
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785465
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Group.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Group-1.0.5-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833573
--- Comment #5 from Michael Cronenworth ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I like separating the devel packages so if you install one you don't
> automatically pull in the other library.
The only problem with splitting -devel packages is that the in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785489
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Vfs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Vfs-1.0.9-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785487
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Tree.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Tree-1.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mai
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785451
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Token.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Token-1.1.7-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785457
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Text-Flowed.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Text-Flowed-1.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are rece
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785486
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Text-Filter.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Text-Filter-1.1.5-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are rece
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785455
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Support.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Support-1.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785471
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Stream-Wrapper.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Stream-Wrapper-1.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You ar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785474
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Prefs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Prefs-1.1.8-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785473
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Perms.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Perms-1.0.7-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785460
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Mime.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Mime-1.6.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mai
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785453
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Mail.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Mail-1.2.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mai
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756776
--- Comment #5 from Erik van Pienbroek ---
Okay, let's go:
- The BuildRoot tag is not needed any more with modern RPM, so it can be
removed
- The Requires: pkgconfig is currently mentioned in the global section (the
mingw-libosinfo). However, as
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785468
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Image.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Image-1.0.10-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785466
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Http.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Http-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mai
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #14 from Richard Shaw ---
Nah, good enough for me.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedorapr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #13 from Alec Leamas ---
If you insist, I will certainly drop it. But I prefer to use it - it's a
question of keeping rpmlint output at a reasonable size. Without the patch, the
output is just insane.
And since the guidelines allows
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785463
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Form.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Form-1.1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mai
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=826563
--- Comment #5 from kc8...@gmail.com ---
New Spec URL: http://kc8hfi.fedorapeople.org/fuelmanager.spec
New SRPM URL: http://kc8hfi.fedorapeople.org/fuelmanager-0.3.7-1.fc17.src.rpm
Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?task
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785472
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Db.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Db-1.2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #12 from Richard Shaw ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > (In reply to comment #8)
> > > Also, it's never OK to patch licenses.[cut] You
> > > might as well send them your patch.
> Already done, see the comme
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785492
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Controller.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Controller-1.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiv
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #11 from Alec Leamas ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Also, it's never OK to patch licenses.[cut] You
> > might as well send them your patch.
Already done, see the comment attached to the patch.
--
You ar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785450
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Cache.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Cache-1.0.5-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #10 from Alec Leamas ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Also, it's never OK to patch licenses. The bad FSF address is not considered
> a blocker but it is recommended to at least tell upstream about it. You
> might as well send them your
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785449
--- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Browser.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Browser-1.0.7-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785447
--- Comment #2 from Nick Bebout ---
Updated
Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Auth.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nb.fedorapeople.org/horde-reviews/php-horde-Horde-Auth-1.4.9-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
python-pyudev-0.15-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pyudev-0.15-1.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC l
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816124
--- Comment #38 from Jindrich Novy ---
It should be in sync now.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #9 from Richard Shaw ---
Duh, I looked at your LICENSING file... never mind. But perhaps using the
guidelines version of the comment and file name would be good?
# For a breakdown of the licensing, see PACKAGE-LICENSING
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #8 from Richard Shaw ---
Also, it's never OK to patch licenses. The bad FSF address is not considered a
blocker but it is recommended to at least tell upstream about it. You might as
well send them your patch.
--
You are receiving t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817271
--- Comment #7 from Richard Shaw ---
Ok, licenses is one of my weak points and I'm not sure you have all the bases
covered but I could definitely be wrong :)
Licenses detected in source:
$ licensecheck -r . | awk -F ": " '{ print $2 }' | sort |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
Chris Lockfort changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #11 from Chris
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808258
--- Comment #11 from Andy Grover ---
Hi Ralph.
Even if upstream isn't receptive (it's been 6 days, how long were you thinking
we should wait?), I don't know if we'd need to "fork", we could just run the
translation (and add the note to the READM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||limburg...@gmail.com
--- Comment #10 from J
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816124
--- Comment #37 from Jon Ciesla ---
Spec and SRPM spec don't match, please post new, matching URLs.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review maili
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816124
--- Comment #36 from Jindrich Novy ---
Sorry for delay. I'm back from holidays. The spec & src.rpm is now updated.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
packa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802549
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
axis2-1.6.1-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/axis2-1.6.1-3.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818805
--- Comment #20 from Jon Ciesla ---
Duplicate.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
Chris Lockfort changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #9 from Chris Lockfort ---
FAS email changed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818805
Alec Leamas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla ---
Email address clockf...@csh.rit.edu is not a valid bugzilla email address.
Either make a bugzilla account with that email address or change your email
address in the Fedora Account System
https://admin.fedorapr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819953
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
lightdm-gtk-1.1.6-3.fc16,lightdm-kde-0.1.1-6.fc16,lightdm-1.2.2-15.fc16 has
been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lightdm-gtk-1.1.6-3.fc16,lightdm-kde-0.1.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819953
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
lightdm-kde-0.1.1-6.fc17,lightdm-gtk-1.1.6-3.fc17,lightdm-1.2.2-15.fc17 has
been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lightdm-kde-0.1.1-6.fc17,lightdm-gtk-1.1.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #7 from Chris Lockfort ---
Fixed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https:/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
Chris Lockfort changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
Chris Lockfort changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
|pyth
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla ---
Summary and SCM package names don't match, please correct.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing lis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834069
Paul Wouters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pwout...@redhat.com
Assignee|no
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
Chris Lockfort changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=831491
--- Comment #9 from Ralph Bean ---
I forgot to mark the bug number in bodhi, but this has been pushed to testing.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-9583/php-zmq-0.6.0-4.20120613git516bd6f.fc17
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/up
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833573
--- Comment #4 from Richard Shaw ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > 2. I know hogweed is a library and on some other distros library packages
> > are always prefixed with lib, but as we don't have that convention in
> > F
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833573
--- Comment #3 from Michael Cronenworth ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> 2. I know hogweed is a library and on some other distros library packages
> are always prefixed with lib, but as we don't have that convention in
> Fedora, would it not be bet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818805
--- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808258
--- Comment #10 from Ralph Bean ---
Thanks, Michael. :)
Andy, let's wait just a little while for a response from amoffat on
https://github.com/amoffat/pbs/pull/64 ; I'd really like his feedback.
If he's unresponsive, you can probably run that
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818805
Alec Leamas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #17 from Alec Leam
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818805
Brendan Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #16 from Bren
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System ---
maven-processor-plugin-2.0.5-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora
17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/maven-processor-plugin-2.0.5-2.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833204
--- Comment #6 from Ralph Bean ---
You might create a ticket for the update to python-pyramid and mark this ticket
as blocking on that one.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818805
--- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla ---
Brendan, please ser fedora-review to +.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@l
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818805
Alec Leamas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Flags|fedora-review+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #6 from gil catta
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
Marek Goldmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Mare
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #5 from Chris Lockfort ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: python-pyudev
Short Description: Python bindings for libudev
Owners: clockfort
Branches: f17, el6
InitialCC:
--
You are receiving this mail bec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833573
Richard Shaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hobbes1...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829713
--- Comment #10 from vasc...@gmail.com ---
It not compile in rawhide. I created bugreport to upstream
https://github.com/Grive/grive/issues/72
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
__
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
--- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo ---
Spec URL:
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/maven-processor-plugin/2/maven-processor-plugin.spec
SRPM URL:
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/maven-processor-plugin/2/maven-processor-plugin-2.0.5-2.fc16.src.rpm
- fix licen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834239
--- Comment #1 from Jørn Lomax ---
Updated .spec:http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/packeging/monobristol.spec
updated SRPM:
http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/packeging/monobristol-0.60.3-3.fc17.src.rpm
rpmlint .spec:
0 packages and 1 specfiles check
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834098
--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833164
--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla ---
Please include an SCM request.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832504
--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
No need to request f18, devel is automatic.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
pack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830155
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736717
--- Comment #6 from Dennis van Dok ---
The lcmaps package has been extensively updated upstream; once more I would
like to request for a review for inclusion in Fedora.
The spec file is
http://software.nikhef.nl/dist/redhat/el5/mwsec/SPECS/lcmap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829713
--- Comment #9 from vasc...@gmail.com ---
Can you show full build log? Because my build was succesfull
http://koji.russianfedora.ru/packages/grive/0.2.0/1.fc17.R/data/logs/i686/build.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825854
--- Comment #22 from Jørn Lomax ---
Here is (hopefully) the final update
spec: http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/packeging/zita-alsa-pcmi.spec
srpm:
http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/packeging/zita-alsa-pcmi-0.2.0-6.fc17.src.rpm
rpmlint->.spec:
0 p
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
--- Comment #3 from Marek Goldmann ---
Thanks, but we still don't know what's the actual license of this project. Once
we hear back from the developer - we can move forward with the review. Until
then, I'm holding this review.
--
You are receiv
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834239
Brendan Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brendan.jones...@gmail.com
B
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
|maven-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815098
--- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo ---
Spec URL:
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/maven-processor-plugin/1/maven-processor-plugin.spec
SRPM URL:
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/maven-processor-plugin/1/maven-processor-plugin-2.0.5-2.fc16.src.rpm
- fix summa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829713
--- Comment #8 from Matthias Runge ---
Missing reference to no rm -rf in install:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828879
--- Comment #13 from Lukáš Czerner ---
Hi Eric,
thank you very much for the review! I have updated description according your
comments in Comment 7.
Regarding the commands used in the system storage manager:
cryptsetup-luks - is not required a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829713
--- Comment #7 from Matthias Runge ---
rpmdev-newspec is ONE way to create specs.
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
(I
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
