https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #15 from Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
--- Comment #14 from Jan Safranek ---
cura-storage-0.1-3.fc18 is heading also to rawhide. Thanks everybody for review
& git, and Jon, sorry again to rush this.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
cura-storage-0.1-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cura-storage-0.1-3.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
--- 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=844963
--- Comment #11 from Jon Stanley ---
Thanks Tomas! Sorry I didn't get to this in time :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
pac
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Jan Safranek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #10 from Jan Safr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Tomas Smetana changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #9 from Tomas
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Jan Safranek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(jonstanley@gmail. |
|com)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
--- Comment #7 from Tomas Smetana ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Tomas Smetana changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|jonstan...@gmail.com|tsmet...@redhat.com
--- Comment #6 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Jan Safranek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(jonstanley@gmail.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
--- Comment #4 from Jan Safranek ---
I have indeed no intention to run this package on RHEL5, so I removed
python_sitelib and python_sitearch and CFLAGS as suggested.
Regarding Anaconda stability, I'm working with Anaconda guys to stabilize it,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Jon Stanley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Jon Stanley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Jon Stanley
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
--- Comment #2 from Jon Stanley ---
In general a very simple spec that looks good, but seems somewhat weird. I
guess I should ask what the intended use of this package is, because it looks
like it uses storage stuff from pyanaconda, which would b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844963
Jon Stanley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jonstan...@gmail.com
Assignee|no
18 matches
Mail list logo
