Re: Review request for gmobile

[Robert-André Mauchin]

On 08/06/2024 07:09, Tomi Lähteenmäki wrote:

Hi,

I sent a review request for gmobile [1] a bit over two weeks ago. The 
gmobile is written in C and it is dependency of phosh and phoc and 
upcoming phrog package.


If someone would have time to review the request it would be great.

-Tomi

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2281588


You've got yourself a fancy review to check up on.

Best regards,

Robert-André
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request for gmobile

[Tomi Lähteenmäki]

Hi,

I sent a review request for gmobile [1] a bit over two weeks ago. The gmobile 
is written in C and it is dependency of phosh and phoc and upcoming phrog 
package.

If someone would have time to review the request it would be great.

-Tomi

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2281588
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request: python-libgravatar

[Kai A. Hiller]

Hi Sandro,

I’ll take the review. Would be glad if you looked at rust-ulid 
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278199).


Best wishes
Kai

On 07/05/2024 09.04, Sandro Mani wrote:

Hi

pgadmin4 grew a dependency on python-libgravatar, which I've posted 
for review here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279493


Happy to review in exchange.

Thanks
Sandro
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: python-libgravatar

[Sandro Mani]

Hi

pgadmin4 grew a dependency on python-libgravatar, which I've posted for 
review here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279493


Happy to review in exchange.

Thanks
Sandro
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: gdb-gef

[Gordon Messmer]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2276821

GEF is a Python GDB extension that I'd like to use to add tests to 
monitor and detect GOT poisoning attacks, such as the one used in the 
liblzma attack.  For example, this proof-of-concept test for openssh:


https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openssh/pull-request/73
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request: mruby

[Jarek Prokop]

On 4/17/24 11:38 AM, Marián Konček wrote:
Nice catch, using it and removing the line "conf.enable_debug" makes 
the build use the proper flags. However, I still don't know how to 
tell Rake to add a `-Wl,-soname,...` option to each .so separately.


Check out `build_config/default.rb`. It has a lot of commented out 
options, one of those is config.linker. You can copy that over and 
adjust for Fedora.


Copying a bit of the following linker options into the host-shared.rb 
target, I get the -Wl,-z,relro etc from LDFLAGS in. However if something 
more is needed I do not know, but you can easily append more flags.

~~~
  # Linker settings
  conf.linker do |linker|
    linker.command = ENV['LD'] || 'gcc'
    linker.flags = ENV['LDFLAGS']
    linker.link_options = %Q[%{flags} -o "%{outfile}" %{objs} %{libs}]
  end
~~~

I'd also note that `readelf --dynamic` for any binary gives: `Shared 
library: [/builddir/build/BUILD/mruby-3.3.0/build/host/lib/libmruby.so]` 
and the solib has no NAME section on it.


It seems that for the host-shared config, `config.archiver` seems like 
the correct place for appending flags for .so files, since it is using GCC.
I spent some time with it, but so far I was unable to fully build 
everything properly with also the `-soname`. I got to libmruby_core.so, 
but then it started complaining for other artifacts. Probably the -L and 
-l options also need adjustments in the linker when it comes to paths 
after fixing the path.


It'll likely need more convincing. It seems it is doing a lot in 
absolute paths, almost everywhere with everything, including soname data.


To be more in line with the guidelines WRT to the -soname option.



On 16. 4. 2024 18:11, Jarek Prokop wrote:


On 4/16/24 4:16 PM, Marián Konček wrote:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2275294

I applied downstream changes which build a shared object (upstream 
provides no way of doing so, only a static library).


Upstream provides many ways to compile to many targets including 
using solibs, have a look:

https://github.com/mruby/mruby/tree/3.3.0/build_config

One can even write it themselves if the upstream ones doesn't cater 
to one's needs of their goal.


Definitions in that directory can be referred to in MRUBY_CONFIG 
variable used in rake command as the filename without the extension, 
for example to build a shared library:`rake MRUBY_CONFIG=host-shared 
all `


Though in my small tests some adjustment for the upstream code would 
be needed to have it respect Fedora {C,CXX,LD}FLAGS properly, but I 
might've missed something.


Regards,
Jarek
--

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request: mruby

[Marián Konček]

Nice catch, using it and removing the line "conf.enable_debug" makes the 
build use the proper flags. However, I still don't know how to tell Rake 
to add a `-Wl,-soname,...` option to each .so separately.


On 16. 4. 2024 18:11, Jarek Prokop wrote:


On 4/16/24 4:16 PM, Marián Konček wrote:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2275294

I applied downstream changes which build a shared object (upstream 
provides no way of doing so, only a static library).


Upstream provides many ways to compile to many targets including using 
solibs, have a look:

https://github.com/mruby/mruby/tree/3.3.0/build_config

One can even write it themselves if the upstream ones doesn't cater to 
one's needs of their goal.


Definitions in that directory can be referred to in MRUBY_CONFIG 
variable used in rake command as the filename without the extension, 
for example to build a shared library:`rake MRUBY_CONFIG=host-shared 
all `


Though in my small tests some adjustment for the upstream code would 
be needed to have it respect Fedora {C,CXX,LD}FLAGS properly, but I 
might've missed something.


Regards,
Jarek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


--
Marián Konček
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request: mruby

[Jarek Prokop]

On 4/16/24 4:16 PM, Marián Konček wrote:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2275294

I applied downstream changes which build a shared object (upstream 
provides no way of doing so, only a static library).


Upstream provides many ways to compile to many targets including using 
solibs, have a look:

https://github.com/mruby/mruby/tree/3.3.0/build_config

One can even write it themselves if the upstream ones doesn't cater to 
one's needs of their goal.


Definitions in that directory can be referred to in MRUBY_CONFIG 
variable used in rake command as the filename without the extension, for 
example to build a shared library:`rake MRUBY_CONFIG=host-shared all `


Though in my small tests some adjustment for the upstream code would be 
needed to have it respect Fedora {C,CXX,LD}FLAGS properly, but I 
might've missed something.


Regards,
Jarek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: mruby

[Marián Konček]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2275294

I applied downstream changes which build a shared object (upstream 
provides no way of doing so, only a static library).


--
Marián Konček
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review Request to unretire MinEdit

[Benson Muite]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2271521
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review Request: mingw-python-blinker

[Sandro Mani]

Hi

I'd appreciate a review of mingw-python-blinker [1] which is a new 
dependency of mingw-python-flask-3.0.0.


Happy to review in exchange.

Thanks

Sandro

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257095
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 05:17:32PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 06:13:58PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > 
> > On 05.01.24 17:57, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 04:44:36PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:56:56PM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > > > > Hi
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of 
> > > > > test
> > > > > builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign 
> > > > > currently do
> > > > > not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've prepared a
> > > > > podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The review 
> > > > > request is
> > > > > here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > we have the opposite situation with calibre: it builds fine in rawhide 
> > > > with
> > > > podofo-0.10, but does not compile against podofo-0.9.8 in F39. I just
> > > > built calibre-7.2.0 in rawhide, and would like to do the same update
> > > > for F39. Is there any chance you can also push podofo-0.10.x + 
> > > > podofo-compat-0.9.x
> > > > also to F39? I think that'd be OK, because we can keep the packages that
> > > > need the old version building, possibly after adjusting some 
> > > > BuildRequires line.
> > > Bump in the new year. PTAL.
> > 
> > Hi Zbyszek
> > 
> > I already took care of this:
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2334737
> 
> Oh, I missed that. Thanks!

I submitted calibre-7.3.0-1.fc39 now.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 06:13:58PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> 
> On 05.01.24 17:57, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 04:44:36PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:56:56PM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > > 
> > > > I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of 
> > > > test
> > > > builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign 
> > > > currently do
> > > > not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've prepared a
> > > > podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The review 
> > > > request is
> > > > here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > we have the opposite situation with calibre: it builds fine in rawhide 
> > > with
> > > podofo-0.10, but does not compile against podofo-0.9.8 in F39. I just
> > > built calibre-7.2.0 in rawhide, and would like to do the same update
> > > for F39. Is there any chance you can also push podofo-0.10.x + 
> > > podofo-compat-0.9.x
> > > also to F39? I think that'd be OK, because we can keep the packages that
> > > need the old version building, possibly after adjusting some 
> > > BuildRequires line.
> > Bump in the new year. PTAL.
> 
> Hi Zbyszek
> 
> I already took care of this:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2334737

Oh, I missed that. Thanks!

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Sandro Mani]

On 05.01.24 17:57, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 04:44:36PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:56:56PM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:

Hi

I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of test
builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign currently do
not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've prepared a
podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The review request is
here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.

Hi,

we have the opposite situation with calibre: it builds fine in rawhide with
podofo-0.10, but does not compile against podofo-0.9.8 in F39. I just
built calibre-7.2.0 in rawhide, and would like to do the same update
for F39. Is there any chance you can also push podofo-0.10.x + 
podofo-compat-0.9.x
also to F39? I think that'd be OK, because we can keep the packages that
need the old version building, possibly after adjusting some BuildRequires line.

Bump in the new year. PTAL.


Hi Zbyszek

I already took care of this: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2334737


Sandro
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 04:44:36PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:56:56PM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of test
> > builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign currently do
> > not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've prepared a
> > podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The review request is
> > here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> we have the opposite situation with calibre: it builds fine in rawhide with
> podofo-0.10, but does not compile against podofo-0.9.8 in F39. I just
> built calibre-7.2.0 in rawhide, and would like to do the same update
> for F39. Is there any chance you can also push podofo-0.10.x + 
> podofo-compat-0.9.x
> also to F39? I think that'd be OK, because we can keep the packages that
> need the old version building, possibly after adjusting some BuildRequires 
> line.

Bump in the new year. PTAL.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Sandro Mani]

On 17.12.23 17:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:56:56PM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:

Hi

I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of test
builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign currently do
not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've prepared a
podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The review request is
here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.

Hi,

we have the opposite situation with calibre: it builds fine in rawhide with
podofo-0.10, but does not compile against podofo-0.9.8 in F39. I just
built calibre-7.2.0 in rawhide, and would like to do the same update
for F39. Is there any chance you can also push podofo-0.10.x + 
podofo-compat-0.9.x
also to F39? I think that'd be OK, because we can keep the packages that
need the old version building, possibly after adjusting some BuildRequires line.


Hi

I've done so: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-e8f9188f10

Sandro
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:56:56PM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of test
> builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign currently do
> not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've prepared a
> podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The review request is
> here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.

Hi,

we have the opposite situation with calibre: it builds fine in rawhide with
podofo-0.10, but does not compile against podofo-0.9.8 in F39. I just
built calibre-7.2.0 in rawhide, and would like to do the same update
for F39. Is there any chance you can also push podofo-0.10.x + 
podofo-compat-0.9.x
also to F39? I think that'd be OK, because we can keep the packages that
need the old version building, possibly after adjusting some BuildRequires line.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [Review-request] rsms-inter-fonts

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 4:05 AM Luya Tshimbalanga  wrote:
>
> Hello team,
>
> I am looking for a packager to review the package rsms-inter-fonts used as 
> default by Blender 3D software.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2253619
>
> The spec is straightforward as it uses the fonts template.
>

I grabbed it. :)




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Review-request] rsms-inter-fonts

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

Hello team,

I am looking for a packager to review the package rsms-inter-fonts used 
as default by Blender 3D software.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2253619

The spec is straightforward as it uses the fonts template.

Thanks in advance

--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: aespipe - AES encrypting or decrypting pipe

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 10:59 AM Jiri Hladky  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Review Request: aespipe - AES encrypting or decrypting pipe
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244729
>
> Spec URL: https://jhladky.fedorapeople.org/aespipe.spec
> SRPM URL: https://jhladky.fedorapeople.org/aespipe-2.4g-1.fc40.src.rpm
>
> I'm trying to unretire the package. I have worked with upstream developer to 
> WA issues with compilation.
>
> Could anybody please help with the review?

I've grabbed the review.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review Request: aespipe - AES encrypting or decrypting pipe

[Jiri Hladky]

Hi,

Review Request: aespipe - AES encrypting or decrypting pipe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244729

Spec URL: https://jhladky.fedorapeople.org/aespipe.spec
SRPM URL: https://jhladky.fedorapeople.org/aespipe-2.4g-1.fc40.src.rpm

I'm trying to unretire the package. I have worked with upstream developer
to WA issues with compilation.

Could anybody please help with the review?

Thanks a lot
Jirka
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: python-simple-websocket

[Sandro Mani]

Hi

python-socketio / python-engineio grew a new dependency on 
python-simple-websocket. I've submitted it for review at 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587.


Happy to review in exchange.

Thanks
Sandro

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 09:00:34PM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
> This is now done.

Thanks for doing this!

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Sandro Mani]

This is now done.

Sandro

On 15.08.23 23:56, Sandro Mani wrote:

Hi

I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of 
test builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign 
currently do not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've 
prepared a podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The 
review request is here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.


Thanks
Sandro

[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/smani/podofo-0.10.1/builds/
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2232243


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[jani]

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 
Watch 
Original message From: Jason Tibbitts j...@tib.bs 
Date: 16/08/2023  06:58  (GMT+02:00) To: Sandro Mani 
manisan...@gmail.com Cc: Development discussions related to 
Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Planning 
to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for
  podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library null
null___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Jason Tibbitts]

>>>>> Sandro Mani  writes:

> To keep these functional, I've prepared a podofo-compat package with
> the previous 0.9.x library. The review request is here [2]. Happy to
> review in exchange.

Note that it's not necessary to go through the review process for
multiple versions of packages like this, providing they are named
correctly according to
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#multiple

We don't use "compat" in the name but instead just something like
podofo0.9.

To import a package like that, you just do fedpkg request-repo with the
"--exception" flag.  One of the SCM admins will need to approve it but I
try to do that relatively often.

 - J<
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 + review request for podofo-compat for legacy 0.9.x library

[Sandro Mani]

Hi

I'm planning to update to podofo-0.10.1 in rawhide. I did a series of 
test builds here [1], according to which scribus, vfrnav and pdfsign 
currently do not support podofo-0.10.x. To keep these functional, I've 
prepared a podofo-compat package with the previous 0.9.x library. The 
review request is here [2]. Happy to review in exchange.


Thanks
Sandro

[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/smani/podofo-0.10.1/builds/
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2232243
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request: jedit

[Vascom]

I will take it.

чт, 3 авг. 2023 г., 19:24 Zdeněk Žamberský :

> Hello,
>
> review request (jedit):
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2228918
>
> reviewers welcome :)
> thanks
>
> --
> Zdeněk Žamberský
> OpenJDK QE
> Red Hat
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: jedit

[Zdeněk Žamberský]

Hello,

review request (jedit):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2228918

reviewers welcome :)
thanks

--
Zdeněk Žamberský
OpenJDK QE
Red Hat
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972

Andreas Vögele  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Fixed In Version||perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB-1.
   ||010-1.fc39
 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2023-07-05 13:33:42




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 
 ---
The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202072972%23c7
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #6 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Source file is ok
Summary is ok
License is ok
Description is ok
URL and Source are ok
All tests passed
BuildRequires are ok

$ rpm -qp --requires perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB-1.010-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort |
uniq -c | grep -v rpmlib
  1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
  1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
  1 libc.so.6()(64bit)
  1 libmaxminddb.so.0()(64bit)
  1 libperl.so.5.36()(64bit)
  1 perl(IP::Geolocation::MMDB::Metadata)
  1 perl-libs
  1 perl(Math::BigInt) >= 1.999806
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.36.1)
  1 perl(utf8)
  1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.16.0
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 perl(XSLoader)
  1 rtld(GNU_HASH)
Binary requires are Ok.

$ rpm -qp --provides perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB-1.010-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort |
uniq -c
  1 perl(IP::Geolocation::MMDB::Metadata) = 1.010
  1 perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB(x86-64) = 1.010-1.fc39
  1 perl(IP::Geolocation::MMDB) = 1.010
  1 perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB = 1.010-1.fc39
Binary provides are Ok.

$ rpmlint perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB-*
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken
0.3 s

Rpmlint is ok

The package is in line with Fedora and Perl packaging guide lines.

Resolution:
approved


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202072972%23c6
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972



--- Comment #4 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Hi Andreas,

There is one missing thing with not explicitly named files in spec file.
Need to name files in %{perl_vendorlib}/ and %{_mandir}/man3/
See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_explicit_lists


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202072972%23c4
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #14 from Petr Pisar  ---
Andreas, I recommend you to register Alien-libmaxminddb upstream project at

release monitoring service and set there a mapping to Fedora's
perl-Alien-libmaxminddb package. This enables you to automatically receive a
new report in Bugzilla whenever upstream releases a new version on CPAN. See
e.g. Alien-Build  for a
comparison.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202072968%23c14
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ppi...@redhat.com
 Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ppi...@redhat.com
   Fixed In Version||perl-Alien-libmaxminddb-1.0
   ||12-1.fc39




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Andreas Vögele  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2023-06-16 07:44:02




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
Bug 2072972 depends on bug 2072968, which changed state.

Bug 2072968 Summary: Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 
 ---
The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Alien-libmaxminddb


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202072968%23c13
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #12 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
@andr...@andreasvoegele.com Hi Andreas, you were sponsored. You could request
branch and build package.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202072968%23c12
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #11 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
(In reply to Andreas Vögele from comment #9)
> (In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #4)
> > I think that you can remove BuildRequires for coreutils, gcc, and perl-devel
> > The library delivers libmaxminddb, detect it and sets files. 
> > There is no compiling.
> 
> There's a test that compiles C code, which is at the end of t/xs.t. I've
> moved perl-devel and gcc to the spec file's "Tests" requirements.

You are right, thank you.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #10 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Review:
Source file is ok
Summary is ok
License is ok
Description is ok
URL and Source0 are ok
All tests passed
BuildRequires are ok

> rpm -qp --requires perl-Alien-libmaxminddb-1.012-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort | 
> uniq -c | grep -v rpmlib
  1 perl(Alien::Base)
  1 perl(Alien::libmaxminddb)
  1 perl-libs
  1 perl(parent)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(utf8)
  1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.16.0
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 pkgconfig(libmaxminddb)

> rpm -qp --provides perl-Alien-libmaxminddb-1.012-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort | 
> uniq -c
  1 perl(Alien::libmaxminddb::Install::Files)
  1 perl-Alien-libmaxminddb(x86-64) = 1.012-1.fc39
  1 perl(Alien::libmaxminddb) = 1.012
  1 perl-Alien-libmaxminddb = 1.012-1.fc39

Rpmlint is ok

Package looks good now.

Resolution:
Approved


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #9 from Andreas Vögele  ---
(In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #4)
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> I think that you can remove BuildRequires for coreutils, gcc, and perl-devel
> The library delivers libmaxminddb, detect it and sets files. 
> There is no compiling.

There's a test that compiles C code, which is at the end of t/xs.t. I've moved
perl-devel and gcc to the spec file's "Tests" requirements.

Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05942861-perl-Alien-libmaxminddb/perl-Alien-libmaxminddb.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05942861-perl-Alien-libmaxminddb/perl-Alien-libmaxminddb-1.012-1.fc39.src.rpm


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #8 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #7)
> (In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #4)
> > I think that you can remove BuildRequires for coreutils ...
> 
> The %{_fixperms} macro is implemented using chmod, hence it makes sense to
> retain coreutils as a build requirement, though it's hard to imagine the
> build system not having that by default.

Heh, thanks. I thought it was a residue of COMPAT.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Paul Howarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||p...@city-fan.org



--- Comment #7 from Paul Howarth  ---
(In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #4)
> I think that you can remove BuildRequires for coreutils ...

The %{_fixperms} macro is implemented using chmod, hence it makes sense to
retain coreutils as a build requirement, though it's hard to imagine the build
system not having that by default.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #6 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Sorry I set review as done, but not done.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review+  |fedora-review?




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Review Service  
---
Hello @voegelas,
since this is your first Fedora package, you need to get sponsored by a package
sponsor before it can be accepted.

A sponsor is an experienced package maintainer who will guide you through
the processes that you will follow and the tools that you will use as a future
maintainer. A sponsor will also be there to answer your questions related to
packaging.

You can find all active sponsors here:
https://docs.pagure.org/fedora-sponsors/

I created a sponsorship request for you:
https://pagure.io/packager-sponsors/issue/570
Please take a look and make sure the information is correct.

Thank you, and best of luck on your packaging journey.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #4 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Hi Andreas,

I think that you can remove BuildRequires for coreutils, gcc, and perl-devel
The library delivers libmaxminddb, detect it and sets files. 
There is no compiling.

Other seems ok.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: glsl-language-server

[Marián Konček]

I would like to add this package to Fedora to enable LSP support for 
OpenGL Shading Language.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2208531

My  PR for upstream KDE text editor Kate has already been merged: 
https://invent.kde.org/utilities/kate/-/merge_requests/1227


This project currently statically links libraries from the glslang 
package. According to the maintainers, upstream glslang project does not 
provide ABI to version it's libraries.


--
Marián Konček
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972



--- Comment #3 from Andreas Vögele  ---
Hello Michal,

thanks a lot for the review. I've removed the MODULE_COMPAT requirement. I had
already updated the version and the license in Copr. Today's build with review
output in the "fedora-review" subfolder is here:

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05934643-perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB/

Kind regards,
Andreas

Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05934643-perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB/perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05934643-perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB/perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB-1.010-1.fc39.src.rpm
Description: A Perl module that reads MaxMind DB files and maps IP addresses to
location information such as country and city names
Fedora Account System Username: voegelas


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #3 from Andreas Vögele  ---
Hello Michal,

thanks a lot for the review. I've removed the MODULE_COMPAT requirement. I had
already updated the version and the license in Copr. Today's build with review
output in the "fedora-review" subfolder is here:

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05934631-perl-Alien-libmaxminddb/

Kind regards,
Andreas

Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05934631-perl-Alien-libmaxminddb/perl-Alien-libmaxminddb.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/voegelas/fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05934631-perl-Alien-libmaxminddb/perl-Alien-libmaxminddb-1.012-1.fc39.src.rpm
Description: An Alien module for Perl that provides the C library libmaxminddb
to other modules
Fedora Account System Username: voegelas


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972



--- Comment #2 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
@andr...@andreasvoegele.com Hi Andreas, could we update to last version of
module from CPAN?

I was looking at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968 and the
issues in this are similar.
1) License
2) MODULE_COMPAT


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #2 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
@andr...@andreasvoegele.com Hi Andreas, could we update the spec file to the
last version of the module from CPAN?

Review:
Source file is ok
Summary is ok
License need to update license string to "GPL-1.0-or-later OR
Artistic-1.0-Perl". There is new format in SPDX form.
Description is ok
URL and Source0 are ok
All tests passed
BuildRequires are ok

> rpm -qp --requires perl-Alien-libmaxminddb-1.006-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm  | sort | 
> uniq -c | grep -v rpmlib
  1 perl(Alien::Base)
  1 perl(Alien::libmaxminddb)
  1 perl-libs
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.36.1)
  1 perl(parent)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(utf8)
  1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.16.0
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 pkgconfig(libmaxminddb)

We need to remove "Requires:   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`perl
-V:version`"; echo $version))" line from spec file.

> rpm -qp --provides perl-Alien-libmaxminddb-1.006-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort | 
> uniq -c
  1 perl(Alien::libmaxminddb::Install::Files)
  1 perl-Alien-libmaxminddb(x86-64) = 1.006-1.fc39
  1 perl(Alien::libmaxminddb) = 1.006
  1 perl-Alien-libmaxminddb = 1.006-1.fc39

Rpmlint is ok

btw: If you put spec and srpm files, there is automatic process which helping
review.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072968] Review Request: perl-Alien-libmaxminddb - Find libmaxminddb

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968



--- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Sorry, I forgot about this review.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072968
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2072972] Review Request: perl-IP-Geolocation-MMDB - Read MaxMind DB files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972



--- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Sorry, I forgot about this review.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Kevin, oclock was not updated, and Beson's email made me realize that I could 
go an do it myself. I did that by the time you check. slim's was updated and 
both packages are now in testing.

Best,
Ranjan






On Sunday, May 14, 2023 at 10:49:44 AM CDT, Kevin Fenzi  
wrote: 





On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 02:04:57PM +0300, Benson Muite wrote:
> Ranjan,
> 
> On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> > Thanks! The package was cleared  on BZ some time ago. Is there some 
> > additional review that is needed?
> > 
> Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. It seems to have
> been unretired:
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11417

Yep.

> Though project ownership has not been updated:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oclock

It looks updated to me? Did I miss something there? 
Do let me know in the ticket if so.


> It seems Slim has been unretired:
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11310
> and project ownership updated:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/slim
> Maybe just need to add the new files?


Yes, it should be unretired and all ready to push commits
to/build/update.

kevin

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 02:04:57PM +0300, Benson Muite wrote:
> Ranjan,
> 
> On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> > Thanks! The package was cleared  on BZ some time ago. Is there some 
> > additional review that is needed?
> > 
> Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. It seems to have
> been unretired:
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11417

Yep.

> Though project ownership has not been updated:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oclock

It looks updated to me? Did I miss something there? 
Do let me know in the ticket if so.

> It seems Slim has been unretired:
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11310
> and project ownership updated:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/slim
> Maybe just need to add the new files?

Yes, it should be unretired and all ready to push commits
to/build/update.

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Benson Muite]

Ranjan,

On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Thanks! The package was cleared  on BZ some time ago. Is there some 
> additional review that is needed?
> 
Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. It seems to have
been unretired:
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11417

Though project ownership has not been updated:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oclock

It seems Slim has been unretired:
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11310
and project ownership updated:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/slim
Maybe just need to add the new files?

> Best wishes,
> Ranjan
> 
> 
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Sandro]

On 14-05-2023 12:40, Benson Muite wrote:

It seems it is just the review that is needed:


The re-review is done:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138

Releng unretiring the package is the next step, really.

-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Benson,

Thanks! The package was cleared  on BZ some time ago. Is there some additional 
review that is needed?

Best wishes,
Ranjan



On Sunday, May 14, 2023 at 05:41:35 AM CDT, Benson Muite 
 wrote: 





Hi Ranjan,

Thanks for contributing to Fedora and maintaining packages.

On 5/14/23 03:27, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Thanks, Kevin! No  problem, no rush, I did not quite know what to expect, 
> hence the questions. Thanks again!
> 
> 
It seems it is just the review that is needed:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_orphan_and_retired_packages/#unorphaning_and_unretiring_packages

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/#claiming

Generally reviews go faster if the person asking for the review does a
review of another package - many people ask for review swaps on this
list. For a package with a reviewer you can add NEEDINFO in bugzilla so
that if an person has assigned themselves as reviewer does not respond
after a while, a new reviewer can take it up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 06:12:33 PM CDT, Kevin Fenzi  
> wrote: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote:
> 
>> On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
>>> Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not 
>>> even a request for additional information.
>>
>> Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the
>> meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it.
>>
>> Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings.
> 
> 
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Sandro]

On 14-05-2023 00:45, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:

Thanks, Sandro! How does one ping in the ticket on paguire?


The easiest way is to just leave a comment in the ticket. If you need 
info from a specific person you would tag that person (@fas_user). That 
ensures people watching the ticket queue get another notification, 
bringing the ticket to their attention again.


But since Kevin already explained the delay, there's no need for that 
now. Either Kevin or the person returning from PTO next week will surely 
pick it up.


-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Benson Muite]

Hi Ranjan,

Thanks for contributing to Fedora and maintaining packages.

On 5/14/23 03:27, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Thanks, Kevin! No  problem, no rush, I did not quite know what to expect, 
> hence the questions. Thanks again!
> 
> 
It seems it is just the review that is needed:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_orphan_and_retired_packages/#unorphaning_and_unretiring_packages

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/#claiming

Generally reviews go faster if the person asking for the review does a
review of another package - many people ask for review swaps on this
list. For a package with a reviewer you can add NEEDINFO in bugzilla so
that if an person has assigned themselves as reviewer does not respond
after a while, a new reviewer can take it up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 06:12:33 PM CDT, Kevin Fenzi  
> wrote: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote:
> 
>> On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
>>> Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not 
>>> even a request for additional information.
>>
>> Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the
>> meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it.
>>
>> Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings.
> 
> 
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Thanks, Kevin! No  problem, no rush, I did not quite know what to expect, hence 
the questions. Thanks again!






On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 06:12:33 PM CDT, Kevin Fenzi  
wrote: 





On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote:

> On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> > Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not 
> > even a request for additional information.
> 
> Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the
> meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it.
> 
> Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings.


FYI, the main release engineer who usually processes these was on pto
last week, and I (who do release engineering work in my 'spare' time)
didn't have any time to get to any. 

If there's urgency on any request, please do note that in the ticket... 

We are working on automating unretire requests... hopefully that will
land before too long.

Otherwise we will get to them as soon as we can.

I might be able to do some this weekend, but I am trying to catch up on
around the house/yard tasks, so no promises. :)

kevin

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote:
> On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> > Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not 
> > even a request for additional information.
> 
> Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the
> meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it.
> 
> Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings.

FYI, the main release engineer who usually processes these was on pto
last week, and I (who do release engineering work in my 'spare' time)
didn't have any time to get to any. 

If there's urgency on any request, please do note that in the ticket... 

We are working on automating unretire requests... hopefully that will
land before too long.

Otherwise we will get to them as soon as we can.

I might be able to do some this weekend, but I am trying to catch up on
around the house/yard tasks, so no promises. :)

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Thanks, Sandro! How does one ping in the ticket on paguire?



On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 07:41:47 PM CDT, Sandro  wrote: 





On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not even 
> a request for additional information.

Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the 
meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it.

Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings.

-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Sandro]

On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:

Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not even a 
request for additional information.


Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the 
meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it.


Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings.

-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not even a 
request for additional information.



On Sunday, May 7, 2023 at 10:50:42 AM CDT, Sandro  wrote: 





On 07-05-2023 17:34, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it
> was automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this
> request last evening.

I don't think it's fully automated. It's a member of the releng team 
that has to process it. They will be back on duty on Monday.

See for example te previous unretirement request for oclock:

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396

-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

I see, thanks! I had indeed forgotten that the previous request had been closed.



On Sunday, May 7, 2023 at 10:50:42 AM CDT, Sandro  wrote: 





On 07-05-2023 17:34, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it
> was automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this
> request last evening.

I don't think it's fully automated. It's a member of the releng team 
that has to process it. They will be back on duty on Monday.

See for example te previous unretirement request for oclock:

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396

-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Sandro]

On 07-05-2023 17:34, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:

How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it
was automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this
request last evening.


I don't think it's fully automated. It's a member of the releng team 
that has to process it. They will be back on duty on Monday.


See for example te previous unretirement request for oclock:

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396

-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it was 
automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this request last 
evening.





On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 07:25:30 PM CDT, Globe Trotter via devel 
 wrote: 





Thank you for this. I got:

fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/oclock-1.0.4-4.fc37.src.rpm
Removing no longer used file: dead.package
Could not execute import_srpm: This package or module is retired. The action 
has stopped.

so I guess I have request unretirement. I thought I did it sometime ago, but 
maybe not.

Thanks again!




On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 04:52:55 PM CDT, Sandro  
wrote: 





On 06-05-2023 23:43, Sandro wrote:
> On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
>> Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after
>> F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up.
>> It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks!
> 
> Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to
> '+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a
> dist-git repo.

Or rather file a releng ticket requesting unretirement at 
https://pagure.io/releng/new_issue?template=package_unretirement=Unretire%20%3Cpkgname%3E
 
now the package is approved.

Sorry for the confusion.


-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Thank you for this. I got:

fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/oclock-1.0.4-4.fc37.src.rpm
Removing no longer used file: dead.package
Could not execute import_srpm: This package or module is retired. The action 
has stopped.

so I guess I have request unretirement. I thought I did it sometime ago, but 
maybe not.

Thanks again!




On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 04:52:55 PM CDT, Sandro  
wrote: 





On 06-05-2023 23:43, Sandro wrote:
> On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
>> Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after
>> F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up.
>> It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks!
> 
> Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to
> '+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a
> dist-git repo.

Or rather file a releng ticket requesting unretirement at 
https://pagure.io/releng/new_issue?template=package_unretirement=Unretire%20%3Cpkgname%3E
 
now the package is approved.

Sorry for the confusion.


-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Sandro]

On 06-05-2023 23:43, Sandro wrote:

On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:

Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after
F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up.
It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks!


Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to
'+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a
dist-git repo.


Or rather file a releng ticket requesting unretirement at 
https://pagure.io/releng/new_issue?template=package_unretirement=Unretire%20%3Cpkgname%3E 
now the package is approved.


Sorry for the confusion.

-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Sandro]

On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:

Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after
F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up.
It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks!


Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to 
'+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a 
dist-git repo.


-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Sorry, forgot the BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138





On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 12:36:20 PM CDT, Globe Trotter 
 wrote: 





Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after F35, and 
I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. It was tentatively 
approved, but never finally done so. Thanks!




On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 02:43:00 PM CST, Björn Persson 
 wrote: 





Ben Beasley wrote:

> Please compare with 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xfontsel/blob/rawhide/f/xfontsel.spec, 
> paying close attention to the comments in the spec file. SKS keyservers have 
> gone offline since that package obtained its keyring, so try using 
> hkps://keys.openpgp.org instead.


To elaborate on this, the procedure described in xfontsel.spec finds the
key that was used to make the signature, so whoever made the signature
becomes the trusted upstream.

If you do that *once*, it's a form of trust on first use. It lets you
discover future attacks as long as you continue using the same key,
assuming that you got the right key to begin with.

If you would repeat the key lookup every time you upgrade the package,
then you would render the verification meaningless. You'd just be
verifying that the tarball was signed by whoever signed the tarball. So
don't do that.

Björn Persson

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after F35, and 
I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. It was tentatively 
approved, but never finally done so. Thanks!




On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 02:43:00 PM CST, Björn Persson 
 wrote: 





Ben Beasley wrote:

> Please compare with 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xfontsel/blob/rawhide/f/xfontsel.spec, 
> paying close attention to the comments in the spec file. SKS keyservers have 
> gone offline since that package obtained its keyring, so try using 
> hkps://keys.openpgp.org instead.


To elaborate on this, the procedure described in xfontsel.spec finds the
key that was used to make the signature, so whoever made the signature
becomes the trusted upstream.

If you do that *once*, it's a form of trust on first use. It lets you
discover future attacks as long as you continue using the same key,
assuming that you got the right key to begin with.

If you would repeat the key lookup every time you upgrade the package,
then you would render the verification meaningless. You'd just be
verifying that the tarball was signed by whoever signed the tarball. So
don't do that.

Björn Persson

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [Review request] gnome-shell-extension-screen-autorotate

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

Here is the fixed link for review: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183901



Thanks

On 2023-04-02 20:02, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:


Hello team,

I packaged gnome-shell-extension-screen-autorotate needed for 2-in-1 
device running on GNOME Shell.
The spec file should adhere to the new guideline recommending the use 
of %autorelease and %autochangelog.


Without delay, here is the link for 
reviewhttps://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183901


Thanks in advance

--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer

___
devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email todevel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of 
Conduct:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List 
Archives:https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report 
it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Review request] gnome-shell-extension-screen-autorotate

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

Hello team,

I packaged gnome-shell-extension-screen-autorotate needed for 2-in-1 
device running on GNOME Shell.
The spec file should adhere to the new guideline recommending the use of 
%autorelease and %autochangelog.


Without delay, here is the link for 
reviewhttps://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183901


Thanks in advance

--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review Request: unretire slim

[Globe Trotter via devel]

Hi,

I have filed a BZ request for unretiring slim. It is at: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2173236

Can someone please review it?

Best!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: perl-String-License, perl-Test2-Tools-Command

[Sandro Mani]

Hi

licensecheck-3.3.8 once again grew some new dependencies, reviews here:

perl-Test2-Tools-Command - 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2165335
perl-String-License - 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2165336


Happy to review in exchange.

Thanks
Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: mingw-python-pyproject-hooks

[Sandro Mani]

Hi

I'd need mingw-python-pyproject-hooks reviewed: it is required by 
mingw-python-build, which is currently FTI and hence preventing any 
mingw-python-* package from getting built.


Review is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2163339

Should be a very easy one. Happy to review in exchange.

Thanks
Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 4:26 AM Tomáš Popela  wrote:
>
> Hi Neal,
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:15 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the EOL period is further out, but I'd rather make it so that the
>> next RHEL will have ImageMagick 7 right from the beginning.
>
>
> Just to be transparent: ImageMagick (or GraphicsMagick) won't be in RHEL 10 
> (or in any future version of RHEL). It might be in EPEL, but not in RHEL.
>

Sure. I can practically guarantee it'll be in EPEL because it's too
necessary to not have it.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Tomáš Popela]

Hi Neal,

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:15 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:

> Yes, the EOL period is further out, but I'd rather make it so that the
> next RHEL will have ImageMagick 7 right from the beginning.
>

Just to be transparent: ImageMagick (or GraphicsMagick) won't be in RHEL 10
(or in any future version of RHEL). It might be in EPEL, but not in RHEL.

Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Tue, 2022-12-06 at 11:22 -0500, PGNet Dev wrote:
> 
> > As I said earlier in the thread: of the 25 reverse dependencies of
> > the
> > ImageMagick libraries, only five don't build[1].
> > 
> > Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in
> > openSUSE[2],
> > but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
> > want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and
> > old
> > ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
> > expect this to be too difficult to do.
> 
> I understand this^^ is re: distro building/packaging
> 
> there's been at least one mention/question about run-time
> compatibility in this thread
> 
> I've not noticed mention previously, so just in case relevant here,
> fwiw
> 
> lsb_release -rd
> Description:    Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven)
> Release:    37
> 
> rpm -qa | grep -i magick | sort
> GraphicsMagick-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-c++-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-c++-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-perl-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-c++-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-c++-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-libs-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-perl-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick-c++-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick-libs-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> php-pecl-imagick-im6-3.7.0-2.fc37.remi.8.2.x86_64
> 
> rpm -q --whatprovides `which convert`
> ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> 
> 
> IM7 has been in-place for quite awhile here, installed from Remi's
> repos,
> 
> 
> https://blog.remirepo.net/post/2016/12/12/ImageMagick6-and-ImageMagic
> k7
> 
> https://www.howtofixthis.com/categories/installing-linux-tools/instal
> ling-imagemagick-from-remi-repository-or-via-source-code
> https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/how-to-install-imagemagick-7-
> on-fedora-35/20354
> 
> my machines certainly do not touch all packages with any IM deps.
> but, so far, I'm not aware of any complaint/error/etc re: that
> mix/use of *Magick pkgs on a bunch of similarly configured boxes.


TL;DR, but my proposal is almost bring a Remi copy of ImageMagick7 to
Fedora and EPEL. As Remi also based on Fedora and contribute to Fedora
/EPEL, so IMHO I can say is a "team" work . 






-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 11:30 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > While that is true, *I* don't like doing that if I don't have to. I'd
> > rather try to get things fixed upstream in tandem. Upstreams tend to
> > appreciate that in my experience. :)
>
> Sure, but it tends to be significantly more work. Upstreams need to support
> several platforms at once, so they often cannot just move to new libraries
> and drop support for the old ones, and some are also quite picky about code
> style issues that ultimately do not matter to end users.
>
> > (This is probably why so many people think I'm everywhere, to be honest!
> > :P )
>
> :-)
>
> > Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
> > but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
> > want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
> > ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
> > expect this to be too difficult to do.
>
> Well, that is exactly why it is harder to make a patch that is acceptable to
> upstream than one that works in the distribution. A downstream patch can
> even be conditionally applied, if you want to support old and new library
> versions in the same specfile, so the dual support need not be in the patch.
> This is of course not the case for an upstream patch. So then you end up not
> only adding "#ifdef"s for every line you changed, but also need to add a
> build system ("configure") check for the library version. It can turn a
> quick search job into a patch adding dozens of new lines of code.
>

I'll just say this: anything worth doing is worth doing well.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> While that is true, *I* don't like doing that if I don't have to. I'd
> rather try to get things fixed upstream in tandem. Upstreams tend to
> appreciate that in my experience. :)

Sure, but it tends to be significantly more work. Upstreams need to support 
several platforms at once, so they often cannot just move to new libraries 
and drop support for the old ones, and some are also quite picky about code 
style issues that ultimately do not matter to end users.

> (This is probably why so many people think I'm everywhere, to be honest!
> :P )

:-)
 
> Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
> but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
> want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
> ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
> expect this to be too difficult to do.

Well, that is exactly why it is harder to make a patch that is acceptable to 
upstream than one that works in the distribution. A downstream patch can 
even be conditionally applied, if you want to support old and new library 
versions in the same specfile, so the dual support need not be in the patch. 
This is of course not the case for an upstream patch. So then you end up not 
only adding "#ifdef"s for every line you changed, but also need to add a 
build system ("configure") check for the library version. It can turn a 
quick search job into a patch adding dozens of new lines of code.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[PGNet Dev]

As I said earlier in the thread: of the 25 reverse dependencies of the
ImageMagick libraries, only five don't build[1].

Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
expect this to be too difficult to do.


I understand this^^ is re: distro building/packaging

there's been at least one mention/question about run-time compatibility in this 
thread

I've not noticed mention previously, so just in case relevant here, fwiw

lsb_release -rd
Description:Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven)
Release:37

rpm -qa | grep -i magick | sort
GraphicsMagick-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-c++-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-c++-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-perl-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-c++-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-c++-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-libs-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-perl-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick-c++-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick-libs-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
php-pecl-imagick-im6-3.7.0-2.fc37.remi.8.2.x86_64

rpm -q --whatprovides `which convert`
ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64


IM7 has been in-place for quite awhile here, installed from Remi's repos,

https://blog.remirepo.net/post/2016/12/12/ImageMagick6-and-ImageMagick7

https://www.howtofixthis.com/categories/installing-linux-tools/installing-imagemagick-from-remi-repository-or-via-source-code

https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/how-to-install-imagemagick-7-on-fedora-35/20354

my machines certainly do not touch all packages with any IM deps.
but, so far, I'm not aware of any complaint/error/etc re: that mix/use of 
*Magick pkgs on a bunch of similarly configured boxes.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:49 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > There are actually
> > other packages I could fix in Fedora with patches from openSUSE or
> > PLD, but they need more work to not break compatibility with building
> > with GraphicsMagick (which these packages in question support), so
> > using IM6 there for now is fine while that gets worked out.
>
> If there are patches, I do not see why we cannot just apply them downstream
> instead of building against a compat package, especially if we make
> ImageMagick 7 the default as you propose.
>
> There is no rule in Fedora that any and all patches must be upstreamed.
> Especially building against the distribution's version of a library is
> exactly what a distribution is for and hence the perfect example of when it
> makes sense to patch a package.
>

While that is true, *I* don't like doing that if I don't have to. I'd
rather try to get things fixed upstream in tandem. Upstreams tend to
appreciate that in my experience. :)

(This is probably why so many people think I'm everywhere, to be honest! :P )

> IMHO, either we go with Sergio's plan, letting ImageMagick be version 6
> forever and introducing ImageMagick7 (and in the future ImageMagick8, etc.)
> for all newer versions, then we can slowly switch packages from ImageMagick
> to ImageMagick7, or we go with your plan and move ImageMagick to version 7,
> but then we should do all we can to make really everything use the new
> version.
>

As I said earlier in the thread: of the 25 reverse dependencies of the
ImageMagick libraries, only five don't build[1].

Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
expect this to be too difficult to do.

[1]: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/24CLLA46CAIKWRSPYVLZFLDPLTPRDU7U/
[2]: 
https://code.opensuse.org/package/dvdauthor/blob/master/f/dvdauthor-0.7.2-imagemagick7.patch


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:17 AM Michael Cronenworth  wrote:
>
> On 12/6/22 8:31 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > There's a very important difference between September 2017 and now: we
> > know someone else already did it!
>
> Great. Good luck.
>
> > As an aside: I don't appreciate the "high horse" comment, considering
> > during most of this discussion, I was doing the work and evaluating
> > things.
>
> It's unfortunate you feel this way. Maybe we cannot work together.
>

I don't think that's the case. The point I'm making is that I'm not
speaking from a point of arrogance, but trying to speak from the
ideals of what we're supposed to do, while simultaneously trying to
actually execute on that to demonstrate that I'm willing to help to
make it happen. Most of the complaints from Sergio and you seem to be
centered on doing it alone and taking on the entire workload
yourselves, but that is not a requirement at all. I spent a chunk of
my Sunday adapting the ImageMagick packaging, building an ImageMagick6
package, and rebuilding packages from Dist-Git in COPR against
ImageMagick 7 to figure out what the scope of things are.

I truly think that transitioning to ImageMagick 7 for the majority of
packages is a lot less difficult than it was back when it was tried in
2017. And dragging our feet on this isn't going to help anything.

The ImageMagick 6 website itself states the recommendation to move to
ImageMagick 7 now:

> As ImageMagick version 6 is no longer being evolved, we recommend you switch 
> to ImageMagick version 7. In the mean-time we continue to support and add 
> security patches, but not evolve, ImageMagick version 6, until at least 
> August 1, 2030.

Yes, the EOL period is further out, but I'd rather make it so that the
next RHEL will have ImageMagick 7 right from the beginning. And in
EPEL 9, there's one package that needs a patch to build against
ImageMagick 7 if we wanted to make that bump and ship the ImageMagick6
compat package there like I propose we do for Fedora.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> There are actually
> other packages I could fix in Fedora with patches from openSUSE or
> PLD, but they need more work to not break compatibility with building
> with GraphicsMagick (which these packages in question support), so
> using IM6 there for now is fine while that gets worked out.

If there are patches, I do not see why we cannot just apply them downstream 
instead of building against a compat package, especially if we make 
ImageMagick 7 the default as you propose.

There is no rule in Fedora that any and all patches must be upstreamed. 
Especially building against the distribution's version of a library is 
exactly what a distribution is for and hence the perfect example of when it 
makes sense to patch a package.

IMHO, either we go with Sergio's plan, letting ImageMagick be version 6 
forever and introducing ImageMagick7 (and in the future ImageMagick8, etc.) 
for all newer versions, then we can slowly switch packages from ImageMagick 
to ImageMagick7, or we go with your plan and move ImageMagick to version 7, 
but then we should do all we can to make really everything use the new 
version.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Michael Cronenworth]

On 12/6/22 8:31 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:

There's a very important difference between September 2017 and now: we
know someone else already did it!


Great. Good luck.


As an aside: I don't appreciate the "high horse" comment, considering
during most of this discussion, I was doing the work and evaluating
things.


It's unfortunate you feel this way. Maybe we cannot work together.

Take care.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 8:26 AM Michael Cronenworth  wrote:
>
> On 12/5/22 5:41 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > But in general, it looks like an upgrade to ImageMagick 7 will be
> > rather easy to do.
>
> Hi Neal,
>
> I appreciate your eagerness here, but it is a little misled.
>
> Version 7 is radically different than version 6. Most (I don't have an exact 
> figure)
> packages in Fedora are *only* compatible with version 6.
>
> Why do I know this? Check out the ImageMagick git history around September 
> 2017. :)
>

The Git history is not useful. It has no details of why. I've already
looked at it before.

> I think you need to back off the high horse here wanting version 7 as a 
> primary
> package and version 6 as a compat package, but I've relinquished my 
> ImageMagick
> duties as it takes too much time and energy, and Sergio is doing a great job 
> taking
> over.
>

There's a very important difference between September 2017 and now: we
know someone else already did it!

Two distributions have already transitioned from ImageMagick 6 to
ImageMagick 7 by default: PLD (December 2016) and openSUSE (March
2017). As a result of that, a number of packages have already been
made compatible with IM7 over the past five years. Incidentally, this
means ImageMagick 7 is part of SUSE Linux Enterprise 15.

When I went through and rebuilt things, most things *just worked*. I
had to do a very simple tweak to the ImageMagick package to make it
easier to make stuff that's compatible with both find the IM7 headers,
and all but 5 packages built. Only two packages needed patches to
introduce IM6/IM7 compatibility, and one of those isn't dead upstream.
I'll send the patch upstream for that package. There are actually
other packages I could fix in Fedora with patches from openSUSE or
PLD, but they need more work to not break compatibility with building
with GraphicsMagick (which these packages in question support), so
using IM6 there for now is fine while that gets worked out.

I only said we should do it because I know it works. Not doing it
propagates this problem of continuing to default to the legacy
version.

As an aside: I don't appreciate the "high horse" comment, considering
during most of this discussion, I was doing the work and evaluating
things.




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Michael Cronenworth]

On 12/5/22 5:41 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:

But in general, it looks like an upgrade to ImageMagick 7 will be
rather easy to do.


Hi Neal,

I appreciate your eagerness here, but it is a little misled.

Version 7 is radically different than version 6. Most (I don't have an exact figure) 
packages in Fedora are *only* compatible with version 6.


Why do I know this? Check out the ImageMagick git history around September 
2017. :)

I think you need to back off the high horse here wanting version 7 as a primary 
package and version 6 as a compat package, but I've relinquished my ImageMagick 
duties as it takes too much time and energy, and Sergio is doing a great job taking 
over.


Thanks,
Michael
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:57 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
 wrote:
>
> On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with
> > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7,
> > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
>
> I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to version
> 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
>
> --
> Sincerely,
>Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)

We've had just these issues with Java and python, and years ago with
perl and gcc upgrades. Do the "add a suffix" first, to make the new
version available for testing and debugging, because it's going to
break a *lot* of working code that uses tools like "convert". After
that's had a chance to sink in, then switch the default to be the new
ImageMagick 7 tools, and leave a previous version around as
ImageMagick 6.

The "compat-*" packages, such as the compat-gnutls I've worked with in
RHEL, have been useful for compilation of tools demanding current
versions of libraries, but are not helpful with such a large suite of
executable tools as ImageMagick.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 21:06 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 6:32 PM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > Final statement, instead of wasting my time and energy on
> > arguments,
> > Imagemagick7 could already be built on rawhide if someone had done
> > the
> > package review for me
> > 
> 
> 
> I understand the sentiment as another person who has donated 1000s of
> hours to packaging on Fedora, but the "default" package SHOULD be the
> current latest package. It' just part of "Fedora First". 

You are wrong , the default packaging for gtk was gtk+, gtk2 , gtk3,
gtk4 . For wxGTK was wxGTK, wxGTK3 . For Python was python , python3 ,
and you have much more examples that I can remember now 

The ImageMagick 6 series is officially supported until December of
2027.

ImageMagick was not maintained well since about 2018 , Redhat drop it
on el8 and was moved epel because in short and in my humble
interpretation,  gives much work to maintain and have many so bumps
 ( https://access.redhat.com/solutions/4437561  ) 


> So my vote (as much as it matters) is that all packages should be
> built with the latest version in COPR to verify compatibility, and
> the ones that don't, build with an ImageMagik 6 compat package. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Richard
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 6:38 PM Emmanuel Seyman  wrote:
>
> * Neal Gompa [04/12/2022 22:26] :
> >
> > Smooge challenged me earlier in this conversation to provide patches
> > and effort, and I'm doing just that.
>
> Thank you for doing this, btw.
>
> Over the weekend, this became a discussion where none of the
> participants seemed to be listening to the others and it became somewhat
> painful to read. It's nice to see something constructive come out of it.
>

Pretty much the entire time this thread was going on, I was doing some
legwork or actual work on it. It's rare that I'm totally an armchair
engineer about things. :)

Usually I have a lot of other things going on so I can't do as much as
I'd like. Alas, I don't get paid to work on Fedora. :P

But in general, it looks like an upgrade to ImageMagick 7 will be
rather easy to do.




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Emmanuel Seyman]

* Neal Gompa [04/12/2022 22:26] :
>
> Smooge challenged me earlier in this conversation to provide patches
> and effort, and I'm doing just that.

Thank you for doing this, btw.

Over the weekend, this became a discussion where none of the
participants seemed to be listening to the others and it became somewhat
painful to read. It's nice to see something constructive come out of it.

Emmanuel
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review request: Python-pypresence

[Steve Cossette]

Good afternoon/morning everyone,

I'm a co-packager for Lutris, and the newest version (0.5.12) had a couple
more package requirements, one of which is pypresence, which isn't packaged
with Fedora.

I created a review request here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150506 if anyone could help in
reviewing the package so we can update Lutris, that would be greatly
appreciated.

Thanks!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 03. 12. 22 v 17:25 Sérgio Basto napsal(a):

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:

On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:

The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
with
ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
7,
we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick

I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
version
7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.

Anyone is going to review the package or not ?



If you have provided ImageMagic6 as most of the people suggests, you 
wold not need review at all:


https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/


~~~

Contributors and reviewers MUST follow the Package Review Process 
, 
with the following exceptions:


* The package is being created so that multiple versions of the same 
package can coexist in the distribution (or coexist between EPEL and 
RHEL). The package MUST be properly named according to the naming 
guidelines 
 
and MUST NOT conflict with all other versions of the same package.


~~~


Vít


  
I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .


I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
minds ask .

And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.

ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
or I won't do it .

That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.






OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 04/12/2022 20:25, Sérgio Basto wrote:
I don't indent change /usr/bin/convert from ImageMagick6 so probably it 
will /usr/bin/convert-7


Such name change is not a good idea, because /usr/bin/convert and all 
other ImageMagick binaries are used in many scripts and SPECs. You must 
provide symbolic links to unversioned versions.


--
Sincerely,
  Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue