[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 03:46 EST ---
Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gnome-chemistry-utils.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gnome-chemistry-utils-0.6.3-2.src.rpm

New release: 
- Fixed Requires for -devel and -mozplugin packages
- Moved files in docs/reference/html to the devel package
- Install .desktop files using desktop-file-install
- Removed redundant stuff
- Preserve timestamps

I'll ask upstream for icons. BTW, why some .desktop files need to be installed
using desktop-file-install and some do not (or are all these packages wrong)?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217066] Review Request: python-gpod - A python module to access iPod content

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: python-gpod - A python module to access iPod content
Alias: python-gpod-review

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217066





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 04:01 EST ---
Okay, after poking a little it seems that $(pythondir) should be $(pyexecdir) in
bindings/python/Makefile.{ac,in}.  I get double blame for missing that since I
submitted the broken auto-stuff in Makefile.am upstream.  I've put a new source
and spec file up that adds a patch to correct this.  I'll submit this upstream
for inclusion in the next release as well.  (I'm surpised no one noticed this
before on any of the libgpod lists.)

Spec URL: http://pobox.com/~tmz/fedora/python-gpod.spec
SRPM URL: http://pobox.com/~tmz/fedora/python-gpod-0.4.0-3.fc7.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 04:08 EST ---
The icons enquiry has been filed:
https://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/index.php?18443

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 04:15 EST ---
I will review this certainly later

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218176] Review Request: gchempaint - A 2D chemical formulae drawing tool

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gchempaint - A 2D chemical formulae drawing tool


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218176





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 04:17 EST ---
Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gchempaint.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gchempaint-0.6.6-2.src.rpm

New release:
- Removed packages pulled by gnome-chemistry-utils-devel from BuildRequires
- Install desktop files using desktop-file-install
- Fixed Requires for -devel package
- Preserve timestamps

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 04:20 EST ---
Well, before checking 0.6.3-2: (I am currently taking dinner and
I will check it later)

(In reply to comment #5)
> BTW, why some .desktop files need to be installed
> using desktop-file-install and some do not (or are all these packages wrong)?
My recognition is that all packages in Fedora Core/Extras are required
to use desktop-file-utils when installing desktop files. At least
all packages I reviewed are modified to use desktop-file-utils when
it tries to install desktop files without it.

So under my recognition packages installing desktop files without 
desktop-file-utils are all wrong.

NOTE: there are some desktop-*like* files which are installed without
desktop-file-utils (e.g. in xscreensaver-extras-gss)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 201418] Review Request: widelands - GPL Settlers II clone

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: widelands - GPL Settlers II clone


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201418





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 04:20 EST ---
Something is wrong with my RPM. When I try to install the new build so I can
test it, I get the following error:

sudo rpm -ivh widelands-1824-2.i386.rpm
rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery
error: db4 error(-30977) from dbenv->open: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run
database recovery
error: cannot open Packages index using db3 -  (-30977)
error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm

How can I fix it?

Anyway, I'm uploading the SRPM now.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 06:04 EST ---
This software supports chemical-mime-data, so I'll try to wrap up a package.
Feel free to continue the review in the meantime.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] New: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210

   Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for
chemical/* MIME types
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/chemical-mime-data.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/chemical-mime-data-0.1.93-1.src.rpm
Description: A collection of data files which tries to give support for various 
chemical MIME types (chemical/*) on Linux/UNIX desktops. Chemical MIME's have 
been proposed in 1995, though it seems they have never been registered with 
IANA.

Package builds fine inside mock. Rpmlint is silent for source rpm, but outputs 
the following for binary one:
E: chemical-mime-data no-binary
W: chemical-mime-data devel-file-in-non-devel-package 
/usr/share/pkgconfig/chemical-mime-data.pc
I think that it is harmless, and similar to gnome-mime-data package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||177841
  nThis||




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||218210




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 07:47 EST ---
It was not that hard.
Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gnome-chemistry-utils.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gnome-chemistry-utils-0.6.3-1.src.rpm
New release:
- Added doxygen to BuildRequires
- Added support for chemical-mime-data
Now it is blocked by bug #218210

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||218172
  nThis||




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 07:47 EST ---
Oops...
SRPM URL:
http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gnome-chemistry-utils-0.6.3-3.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776  |163778
  nThis||




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 08:10 EST ---
Nice to see another Pole's trying to put his package into Extras :) Good luck!
As for rpmlint output, you can simple shut it up by adding "BuildArch: noarch"
in preamble.
Also, there are some missing dependencies. This package owns files in some
directories owned by other packages. Probably, you have to remove crystalsvg
icons and mimelnk as they're owned by kdelibs package so
they make unneeded kde dependency. %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor creates
hicolor-icon-theme dep; {_datadir}/mime/packages - shared-mime-info.
These are all things need to be fixed I found at first sight :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 08:23 EST ---
Well, I have checked gnome-mime-data package and the comment form the spec says:
### WE ARE NOT NOARCH, /usr/lib/pkgconfig is not noarch. 
### don't change this and don't file a bug. ;-)
As for dependencies, I don't think that I understand a problem. We want chemical
MIME support for KDE as well, don't we? So shall I add kdelibs,
hicolor-icon-theme and shared-mime-info to Requires?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 08:35 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Well, I have checked gnome-mime-data package and the comment form the spec 
> says:
> ### WE ARE NOT NOARCH, /usr/lib/pkgconfig is not noarch. 
> ### don't change this and don't file a bug. ;-)
Yes. .pc file is arch-dependent and if this package requires
this file this package canNOT be noarch.
However
* Is this file needed?
* Anyway the directory is wrong. Currently pc file is under 
 %{_datadir}/pkgconfig, which should be %{_libdir}/pkgconfig

> As for dependencies, I don't think that I understand a problem. We want 
> chemical
> MIME support for KDE as well, don't we? So shall I add kdelibs,
> hicolor-icon-theme and shared-mime-info to Requires?
Owning the directory:
* which is owned by other packages
* however, all the packages which own the directory is not needed
  for the package
is _NOT_ prohibited, and in that case it is the package which
should also own the directory.



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 08:37 EST ---
By the way I have not yet checked this package...

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 08:43 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Well, I have checked gnome-mime-data package and the comment form the spec 
> > says:
> > ### WE ARE NOT NOARCH, /usr/lib/pkgconfig is not noarch. 
> > ### don't change this and don't file a bug. ;-)
> Yes. .pc file is arch-dependent and if this package requires
> this file this package canNOT be noarch.
> However
> * Is this file needed?
> * Anyway the directory is wrong. Currently pc file is under 
>  %{_datadir}/pkgconfig, which should be %{_libdir}/pkgconfig
> 

Strange, but that's where it got installed by default. I have some files in
%{_datadir}/pkgconfig here: xml2po.pc, gnome, icon-theme.pc and a few others. I
can probably fix it to install pkgconfig file into %{_libdir}, though.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 08:52 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Owning the directory:
> * which is owned by other packages
> * however, all the packages which own the directory is not needed
>   for the package
> is _NOT_ prohibited, and in that case it is the package which
> should also own the directory.

Thus chemical-mime-data should also own a %{_datadir}/mimelnk dir. If it doesn't
then removing it will leave empty %{_datadir}/mimelnk dir unowned. I believe
that hicolor-icon-theme and shared-mime-info should be required by this package
nevertheless. A lot of packages own hicolor-icon-theme and it isn't a problem.
Also, shared-mime-info looks like a package related with chemical-mime-data
so requiring it may be necessary.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 211729] Review Request: museek+ - Soulseek network filesharing client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: museek+ - Soulseek network filesharing client


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211729


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 09:04 EST ---
I will review this after you've been sponsored.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 09:46 EST ---
Well, would you check the dependency for this package?
For example:
--
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/offlineimap/ui/Tk.py:import tkFont
--
This means this package requires tkinter. For me tkinter is required
only by python-imaging and comix (both in Extras).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 10:06 EST ---
Well, for directory ownership issue:

/usr/share/icons/crystalsvg/
- (Under my envoronment) only owned by kdelibs.
  I think this package should own this
  (The subdirectories should also)

- /usr/share/icons/hicolor/
  For this directory, adding hicolor-icon-theme to Requires
  is a simplest solution as MichaÅ commented 
  (sorry, however the last character of your first name
  is corrupted in my browser)

- /usr/share/mime
  Requiring shared-mime-info should be the simplest.

- /usr/share/mimelnk/
  Only owned by kdelibs and Ooo related packages.
  This directory should be owned by this package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 207685] Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-farsight - GStreamer plug-ins for farsight protocol

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-farsight - GStreamer plug-ins for 
farsight protocol


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207685





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 10:16 EST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> A couple of questions with regard to the configure options
> 
> --disable-jasper  
> jasper is in Extras currently. Is there a specific problem associated with
> enabling it?  
> 
> --with-plugins=rtpdemux,rtpjitterbuffer
> Are there other optional plugins to explore?

Most of the other plugins are still fairly experimental, and probably not stable
enought to build currently.

The best way to test this is with Stream Engine, which I haven't yet submitted
to FE (September was fairly busy, and it slipped my mind).  I'll send you the
spec & SRPM for it once I update it to the latest version.

Once you have gstreamer-plugins-farsight & Stream Engine installed you can test
it by running 'STREAM_ENGINE_PERSIST=1 telepathy-stream-engine'

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 10:46 EST ---
Well:
* BuildRequires:  chemical-mime-data
  Should this be 'BuildRequires' or 'Requires'?
* By the way, please remove unnecessary comments like:

#mkdir -p -- $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/mime/packages

  which are no longer used to make spec file more legible.

Note:
--add-category=X-Fedora
  Well, FE packaging committee made a semi(?)-conclusion that
  this should be removed because
* desktop-file-utils 0.11 does _NOT_ allow this so
* anyway this is deprecated and of no use
  However, now rawhide is desktop-file-utils 0.12 and this again
  _ALLOWS_ --add-category=X-Fedora ..

I think that '--add-category=X-Fedora' should be removed until
the argument that "--add-category=X-Fedora should be revived"
arises, however, it seems that this (--add-category=X-Fedora) is
okay for now??


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 11:01 EST ---
tkinter is only required when someone wants to use the tkinter user interface of
offlineimap, but there are five other user interfaces that work well. So it is
more an optional requirement, which is not supported by rpm afaik.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 11:16 EST ---
Well, then other dependencies are okay?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 11:21 EST ---
P.S. 'other' means that:
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ ( for f in /usr/bin/offlineimap `rpm -ql offlineimap
| grep py$` ; do grep 'import ' $f ; done ) | sed -e 's|^[ \t]*||' | sort | 
uniq 
from Base import BaseFolder
from Base import BaseRepository
from Blinkenlights import BlinkenBase
from ConfigParser import ConfigParser
from IMAP import IMAPFolder
from Queue import Queue
from ScrolledText import ScrolledText
from StringIO import StringIO
from Tkinter import *
from UIBase import UIBase
from __future__ import nested_scopes
from copy import copy
from getopt import getopt
from getpass import getpass
from mailbox import Maildir
from offlineimap import CustomConfig
from offlineimap import folder
from offlineimap import folder, imaputil
from offlineimap import folder, imaputil, imapserver
from offlineimap import imaplib, imapserver, repository, folder, mbnames,
threadutil, version
from offlineimap import imaplib, imapserver, repository, folder, mbnames,
threadutil, version, syncmaster, accounts
from offlineimap import imaplib, imaputil, threadutil
from offlineimap import imaputil
from offlineimap import imaputil, imaplib
from offlineimap import init
from offlineimap import threadutil
from offlineimap import threadutil, mbnames, CustomConfig
from offlineimap import threadutil, version
from offlineimap import version, threadutil
from offlineimap.CustomConfig import CustomConfigParser
from offlineimap.accounts import SyncableAccount
from offlineimap.folder.UIDMaps import MappedIMAPFolder
from offlineimap.localeval import LocalEval
from offlineimap.repository.IMAP import IMAPRepository, MappedIMAPRepository
from offlineimap.repository.Maildir import MaildirRepository
from offlineimap.threadutil import ExitNotifyThread
from offlineimap.threadutil import InstanceLimitedThread
from offlineimap.threadutil import InstanceLimitedThread, ExitNotifyThread
from offlineimap.threadutil import MultiLock
from offlineimap.ui import UIBase
from offlineimap.ui import UIBase   # for getglobalui()
from offlineimap.ui.Blinkenlights import BlinkenBase
from offlineimap.ui.UIBase import UIBase
from offlineimap.version import versionstr
from stat import *
from threading import *
from threading import Event
from threading import Lock
import Base, IMAP, Maildir, LocalStatus
import Curses
import Noninteractive
import TTY
import Tk
import Tkinter
import UIBase, Blinkenlights
import binascii, re, socket, time, random, sys, os
import curses
import curses, curses.panel, curses.textpad, curses.wrapper
import detector
import errno
import fcntl
import getopt, getpass
import imp
import offlineimap.accounts
import offlineimap.repository.Base, offlineimap.repository.LocalStatus
import offlineimap.ui
import offlineimap.version
import os
import os, re
import os, threading
import os.path
import os.path, os, re, time, socket, md5
import os.path, re
import profile
import re   # for folderfilter
import re, os, os.path, offlineimap, sys
import re, string, types
import re, time, sys, traceback, threading, thread
import re, types, os
import rfc822, time, string, random, binascii, re
import select, sys
import sys
import sys, time
import sys, traceback, thread
import thread
import thread, hmac, os
import thread, time, sys, os, signal, time
import thread, traceback, time, threading
import threading
import time
import tkFont
import traceback
--

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217836] Review Request: vimoutliner - set of vim macros for editing outlines

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: vimoutliner - set of vim macros for editing outlines


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217836





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 11:25 EST ---
Thank you very much. Oh well, only now I found that I have run rpmlint against
_binary_ packages. Oh well, oh well.

Fixed package is available on
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/progs/rpms/vimoutliner-0.3.4-5.src.rpm
and spec file is still in the same location
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/progs/rpms/vimoutliner.spec

Any more comments?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217836] Review Request: vimoutliner - set of vim macros for editing outlines

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: vimoutliner - set of vim macros for editing outlines


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217836





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 11:41 EST ---
Unable to view SPEC and SPRM
You don't have permission to access /matej/progs/rpms/vimoutliner.spec on this
server.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 204493] Review Request: perl-Mozilla-DOM - Perl interface to Mozilla DOM

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: perl-Mozilla-DOM - Perl interface to Mozilla DOM


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204493





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 11:41 EST ---
Chris,
Any progress?
PING
Would like to review this package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 11:56 EST ---
The other imports except Tk which is needed for the user interface are either
from offlineimap modules or modules in the python package which is requirement
is added by rpm. Btw. is there any tool that can help one with this dependency
checking?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 204493] Review Request: perl-Mozilla-DOM - Perl interface to Mozilla DOM

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: perl-Mozilla-DOM - Perl interface to Mozilla DOM


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204493





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 12:02 EST ---
Perhaps you could work on getting it to build with firefox-devel, then.  I had
no luck.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218217] New: Review Request: telepathy-stream-engine - Telepathy client to handle media streaming

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218217

   Summary: Review Request: telepathy-stream-engine - Telepathy
client to handle media streaming
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: 
http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-stream-engine.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-stream-engine-0.3.16-1.src.rpm
Description: A Telepathy client that uses Farsight and GStreamer to handle media
streaming for channels with the IceSignalling interface.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 207685] Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-farsight - GStreamer plug-ins for farsight protocol

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-farsight - GStreamer plug-ins for 
farsight protocol


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207685





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 12:21 EST ---
Here's my review request for telepathy-stream-engine:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218217

BTW, I've brought my server back online for now for these packages.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 12:22 EST ---
Well, then this package meets 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines

--
  This package (offlineimap) is APPROVED by me.
--
By the way, it seems that 4.0.16 is released.

(In reply to comment #6)
> Btw. is there any tool that can help one with this dependency
> checking?
I have several applications packaged which uses python, at which
time I always had to check python-related dependency manually...
In fact I really want that tool.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 167147] Review Request: Aqsis

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: Aqsis


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167147


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|fedora-extras-  |
   |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
 CC||fedora-package-
   ||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 CC|fedora-package- |
   |[EMAIL PROTECTED]   |
 CC||fedora-extras-
   ||[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|WONTFIX |
 Status|CLOSED  |NEW
   Keywords||Reopened




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 201418] Review Request: widelands - GPL Settlers II clone

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: widelands - GPL Settlers II clone


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201418





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 12:42 EST ---
That is most likely not a problem with your RPM, but with your local RPM
database, to fix it remove rpm's database cache files:
rm /var/lib/rpm/__db.*

And the try again. I'm currently really really busy (moving from one home to
another), so don't expect a review of the SRPM soon, I will take a look as time
permits.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217066] Review Request: python-gpod - A python module to access iPod content

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: python-gpod - A python module to access iPod content
Alias: python-gpod-review

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217066


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778, 177841  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 12:45 EST ---
The packages from Comment #13 seem to work fine on x86_64 now... so I think your
fix is correct. 

Everything looks good now from what I can see... so this package is APPROVED. 

You can continue the process from: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-a89c07b5b8abe7748b6b39f0f89768d595234907

I'd be happy to sponsor you. Please let me know if I can answer any questions or
assist with the process any from here. 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 215883] Review Request: idioskopos - C++ Introspection Library

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: idioskopos - C++ Introspection Library
Alias: idioskopos

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215883





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 12:57 EST ---
> This is true for people who have to create spec file from
> spec.m4, however, srpm should include spec file (not spec.m4)
> and there is no need to create spec file again from spec.m4.
> So m4 should not needed for this reason.

But, the specs are built by autoconf when configure is run. I know it's not the
best, but I just haven't had time to modify configure.in to take an option of
whether to build the specs or not. Right now, they're always built when
configure is run.

> By the way I cannot rebuild 0.3.2-1 by mockbuild under
> FC-devel i386. Please check the build log attached.

Looks like it was an overload issue with size_t and unsigned int on i386. It's
fixed in the 0.3.3 release.

Spec URL: http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/idioskopos.spec
SRPM URL: http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/idioskopos-0.3.3-1.src.rpm


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 13:22 EST ---
imported and successfully built as 22865 for devel

- version bump
- added one more %%{version} to Source0
- added FAQ.html, todo to %%doc
- added debian/changelog as ChangeLog to %%doc

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218195] Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, records, and objects.

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218195


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776  |163778
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 13:22 EST ---
As stated in the mailing list I will take the review.

Some small questions, why do you do BuildRequires libstdc++? This should work 
without it, no?

I think also the Requires fftw2 is redundant, since rpm will peek the right 
dependency. The same should apply to blas and lapack. Am I missing something 
here?

BTW, %install must have 
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT

at its beginning.

Otherwise the spec looks really clean.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 191218] Review Request: PyScript - Postscript graphics with Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: PyScript - Postscript graphics with Python


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191218





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 13:25 EST ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> And most importantly, has there been a previous review that would have 
counted
> as a full review if you hadn't needed sponsorship.  I want to see if I can
> contact a reviewer who is already looked at this so when I re submit it, we 
can
> streamline the timetable and get this in quickly.

  If wants to take the package with the original submiter as co-maintainer I 
will proceed with the (official) review.

> -jef



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218183] Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories via imap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: offlineimap - sync local and remote mail repositories 
via imap


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218183





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 13:30 EST ---
Forgot to thank you for this fast review :-)
And I just noticed that the Tk Interface probably will be removed in 4.1.0 so
even this optional dependency will go away soon.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 177747] Review Request: glade3

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: glade3


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177747





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 14:11 EST ---
spec updated according to your advice, thank you!

please have a look:

ftp://ftp.fedora.cn/pub/fedora-cn/fe-review/glade3/glade3.spec
ftp://ftp.fedora.cn/pub/fedora-cn/fe-review/glade3/glade3-3.0.2-0.6.src.rpm

changes:

* split to 3 packages: glade3, libgladeui, libgladeui-devel
glade3 is the binary, the desktop related files including a proposed icon from
tango project
libgladeui is the library and shared resource files (pixmaps and catalog xml)
libgladeui-devel is the headers and development documentation

* changed requires and buildrequires

* update description from the website. Still looking for a better description
for libgladeui

* incorporate various things from Martin's sample file


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 216352] Review Request: vdr-sudoku - Sudoku plugin for VDR

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: vdr-sudoku - Sudoku plugin for VDR
Alias: vdr-sudoku

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216352


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776  |163778
  nThis||
  Alias||vdr-sudoku




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 216352] Review Request: vdr-sudoku - Sudoku plugin for VDR

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: vdr-sudoku - Sudoku plugin for VDR
Alias: vdr-sudoku

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216352


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 14:33 EST ---
 REVIEW CHECKLIST 
- rpmlint output clean
- package named according to package naming guidelines
- spec file name matches %{name}
- package meets packaging guidelines
- licensed with open source compatible license
- license matches actual license
- license included in %doc
- spec written in American english
- spec legible
- source match upstream
a32cc677477349823469542896ad389d  vdr-sudoku-0.1.2.tgz
- successfully compiles and builds on FC6 x86_64
- all build dependencies listed in BR
- no locales
- no shared libraries
- not relocatable
- package owns all directories it creates
- directories it does not own are owned by Requires packages
- no duplicates in %files
- file permissions set properly
- contains proper %clean
- macro usage is consistent
- contains code
- no large documentation
- %doc does not affect runtime
- no header files or static libraries
- no pkgconfig files
- devel subpackage not required
- no .la files
- not a GUI application needing a .desktop file
- does not own files or directories owned by other packages

APPROVED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 14:36 EST ---
Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/chemical-mime-data.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/chemical-mime-data-0.1.93-2.src.rpm
New release:
- Fixed ownership
- Fixed .pc file location

I'm not sure I've fixed the ownership issues correctly, please advise.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 14:43 EST ---
Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gnome-chemistry-utils.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gnome-chemistry-utils-0.6.3-4.src.rpm
New release:
- Removed obsolete stuff
- Fixed support for chemical-mime-data
- Removed --add-category X-Fedora from desktop-file-install command

I think that chemical-mime-data should be present both in BuildRequires and in
Requires, as it is checked for presence by configure (and probably should be
installed for this whole operation to make sense).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218176] Review Request: gchempaint - A 2D chemical formulae drawing tool

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gchempaint - A 2D chemical formulae drawing tool


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218176





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 14:46 EST ---
Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gchempaint.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/gchempaint-0.6.6-3.src.rpm
New release:
- Removed --add-category X-Fedora from desktop-file-install command
- Added some wildcards to make %files section shorter

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217998] Review Request: alfont - Font rendering library for the Allegro game library

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: alfont - Font rendering library for the Allegro game 
library
Alias: alfont

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217998





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 14:49 EST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
>  MUST FIX 
> - Investigate rpmlint warnings
This is because I forgot to link the library with allegro, fixed. Now it gives:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] alfont]$ rpmlint alfont
W: alfont undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libalfont.so.2.0.6 _i_cx_r
W: alfont undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libalfont.so.2.0.6 _i_cx_w
W: alfont undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libalfont.so.2.0.6 
_i_get_cpuid_info
W: alfont undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libalfont.so.2.0.6 _i_is_486
W: alfont undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libalfont.so.2.0.6
_i_is_cpuid_supported
W: alfont undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libalfont.so.2.0.6 _i_is_cyrix
W: alfont undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libalfont.so.2.0.6 _i_is_fpu

This is normal, as allegro consists of a dynamiclinked .so and a statically
linked .a filoe which contains some non PIC and thus non sharable asm functions.

Also see the "allegro-config --libs" output.

> - Why is /usr/include/alfont.h.linux in devel package?
patch backup file installed by bad wildcard install, wildcard fixed.

Here is a new version with these both fixed:
Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/alfont.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/alfont-2.0.6-2.fc7.src.rpm


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 215258] Review Request: clucene - A C++ port of Lucene

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: clucene - A C++ port of Lucene


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215258





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 15:06 EST ---
I think, it better to have a %check stanza which conatins the 'make check'
statement.

This may be halpful to get a minimum QA during any update of the package on the
differents plattforms.



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217998] Review Request: alfont - Font rendering library for the Allegro game library

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: alfont - Font rendering library for the Allegro game 
library
Alias: alfont

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217998


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 15:08 EST ---
All MUST items fixed.

APPROVED.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218023] Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to spell words

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to 
spell words
Alias: alphabet-soup

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218023





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 15:26 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>  MUST FIX 
> - Add dumb-devel to BR
Good catch!

> - requires hicolor-icon-theme package
Will I ever learn? :(

Both fixed, new version is here:
Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/alphabet-soup.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/alphabet-soup-1.1-2.fc7.src.rpm


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217998] Review Request: alfont - Font rendering library for the Allegro game library

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: alfont - Font rendering library for the Allegro game 
library
Alias: alfont

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217998


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 15:28 EST ---
Thanks! Imported and build requested, closing.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218023] Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to spell words

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to 
spell words
Alias: alphabet-soup

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218023


Bug 218023 depends on bug 217998, which changed state.

Bug 217998 Summary: Review Request: alfont - Font rendering library for the 
Allegro game library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217998

   What|Old Value   |New Value

 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE
 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218195] Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, records, and objects.

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218195





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 15:33 EST ---
Review for release 2:
* RPM name is OK
* Source scipy-0.5.1.tar.gz is the same as upstream
* Builds fine in mock
* File list looks OK
* License is correct and acceptable (BSD)
* Spec file is written in American English

Needs work:
* The BuildRoot must be cleaned at the beginning of %install
* rpmlint:
W: scipy summary-ended-with-dot Scipy: array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.

  Please remove the final dot from Summary

There are lots of devel-file-in-non-devel-package warnings, why not to put 
this into a subpackage -devel? OTHO since numpy does not have this separation 
this is not a blocker, I think that this issue should be tackled in both 
packages at the same time.


One other question: Why do you use fftw2 and not fftw version 3? Just curious.

Summary, if you fix the cleaning of %install this package is approved. No need 
to submit a new version I trust you to fix this before importing.

APPROVED (with due conditions met, this not is here just for an easier 
reference)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218023] Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to spell words

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to 
spell words
Alias: alphabet-soup

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218023


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 16:04 EST ---
All MUST items fixed. APPROVED.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218225] New: Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-mysql - MySQL MDB2 Driver

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218225

   Summary: Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-mysql - MySQL MDB2
Driver
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: 
http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-mysql.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-mysql-1.3.0-1.src.rpm

Description:
This is the MySQL MDB2 driver.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218225] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-mysql - MySQL MDB2 Driver

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-mysql - MySQL MDB2 Driver
Alias: pear-MDB2-mysql

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218225


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||pear-MDB2-mysql




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218226] New: Review Request: php-pear-Structures-DataGrid-DataSource-MDB2 - DataSource driver using PEAR::MDB2 and an SQL query

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218226

   Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Structures-DataGrid-DataSource-
MDB2 - DataSource driver using PEAR::MDB2 and an SQL
query
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: 
http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Structures-DataGrid-DataSource-MDB2.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Structures-DataGrid-DataSource-MDB2-0.1.2-1.src.rpm

Description:
This is a DataSource driver for Structures_DataGrid using PEAR::MDB2 and an
SQL query.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218226] Review Request: php-pear-Structures-DataGrid-DataSource-MDB2 - DataSource driver using PEAR::MDB2 and an SQL query

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Structures-DataGrid-DataSource-MDB2 - 
DataSource driver using PEAR::MDB2 and an SQL query
Alias: pear-DG-MDB2

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218226


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||pear-DG-MDB2




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 216352] Review Request: vdr-sudoku - Sudoku plugin for VDR

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: vdr-sudoku - Sudoku plugin for VDR
Alias: vdr-sudoku

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216352


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 17:12 EST ---
Thanks!

22892 (vdr-sudoku): Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded.
owners.list updated, FC-6 branch requested, comps updates forthcoming.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218195] Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, records, and objects.

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218195





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 17:13 EST ---
The rpmlint warnings concerning the .h files down in the python site-packages
tree are a matter of interpretation I think. Since these files are not in
/usr/include/python2.4/ I'm not sure there is an expectation that they are to be
built against.  There are many python packages which continue to place .h files
down in the site-packages tree without splitting into a -devel.   

The only python module packages that I am aware of that uses a devel subpackage
install their .h files into the /usr/include/python2.4/ tree.  python-ogg-devel
 for example.  But even that isn't consistently done, python-numarry doesn't
make the effort.  I don't have a problem splitting this stuff off, I just don't
want to set a new packaging policy precedent in the process.

If you could point me to a python module package (ie not a graphical end-user
application) which has .h files down in site-packages and splits out a -devel
subpackage I'd like to look over its spec as a reference.

I fixed the %install section issue and the silly dot at the end of the summar.
Can you tell I'm a couple of months out of practise.  I'm going to play with the
requires and buildrequires a little to see if I can answer the questions.  For
example, I don't know if this will work with fftw version 3yet.

-jef

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218229] New: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Color - Manage and handles color data and conversions

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218229

   Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Color - Manage and
handles color data and conversions
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Image-Color.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Image-Color-1.0.2-1.src.rpm

Description:
Manage and handles color data and conversions.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218229] Review Request: php-pear-Image-Color - Manage and handles color data and conversions

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Color - Manage and handles color data 
and conversions
Alias: pear-Image-Color

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218229


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||pear-Image-Color




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218230] New: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface to image drawing

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218230

   Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface
to image drawing
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Image-Canvas.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Image-Canvas-0.3.0-1.src.rpm

Description:
A package providing a common interface to image drawing, making
image source code independent on the library used.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218230] Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface to image drawing

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface to image 
drawing
Alias: pear-Image-Canvas

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218230


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||pear-Image-Canvas




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 202946] Review Request: aqsis - 3D Rendering system

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: aqsis - 3D Rendering system


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202946


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution||DUPLICATE
 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 17:39 EST ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 167147 ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218232] New: Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to calculate statistical parameters

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218232

   Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to
calculate statistical parameters
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Math-Stats.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Math-Stats-0.9.0-0.1.beta3.src.rpm

Description:
Package to calculate statistical parameters of numerical arrays
of data. The data can be in a simple numerical array, or in a
cummulative numerical array. A cummulative array, has the value
as the index and the number of repeats as the value for the
array item, e.g. $data = array(3=>4, 2.3=>5, 1.25=>6, 0.5=>3).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218232] Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to calculate statistical parameters

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to calculate statistical 
parameters
Alias: pear-Math-Stats

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218232


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||pear-Math-Stats




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 189188] Review Request: sqlgrey - postfix grey-listing policy service

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: sqlgrey - postfix grey-listing policy service


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189188





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:01 EST ---
Hey Steven. 

Any news on an updated version to review here?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 195645] Review Request: rasqal - RDF query library

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: rasqal - RDF query library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195645





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:03 EST ---
Hey Thomas. 

Have you had any chance to look at the issues from comment #17?


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 199679] Review Request: pgpool - Connection pooling/replication server for PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: pgpool - Connection pooling/replication server for 
PostgreSQL


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199679





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:06 EST ---
Hey Devrim. 

Did comment #22 make sense? Or did I miss something?

If you like I can try and test and see what it does with no config file
available... I think we should do whatever option gives the most info to a user
that installs the package and tries to use it out of the box. 


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218195] Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, records, and objects.

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218195


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:09 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The rpmlint warnings concerning the .h files down in the python 
site-packages
> tree are a matter of interpretation I think. Since these files are not in
> /usr/include/python2.4/ I'm not sure there is an expectation that they are 
to be
> built against.  There are many python packages which continue to place .h 
files
> down in the site-packages tree without splitting into a -devel.   
> 
> The only python module packages that I am aware of that uses a devel 
subpackage
> install their .h files into the /usr/include/python2.4/ tree.  
python-ogg-devel
>  for example.  But even that isn't consistently done, python-numarry doesn't
> make the effort.  I don't have a problem splitting this stuff off, I just 
don't
> want to set a new packaging policy precedent in the process.
> 
> If you could point me to a python module package (ie not a graphical 
end-user
> application) which has .h files down in site-packages and splits out 
a -devel
> subpackage I'd like to look over its spec as a reference.

  You are right. This is not blocking, more like a wish. :-)
 
> I fixed the %install section issue and the silly dot at the end of the 
summar.

  Good, I changed the status of this review to approved.

> Can you tell I'm a couple of months out of practise.  I'm going to play with 
the
> requires and buildrequires a little to see if I can answer the questions.  
For
> example, I don't know if this will work with fftw version 3yet.

  From the build log:
fft_opt_info:
fftw3_info:
  libraries fftw3 not found in /usr/local/lib
  libraries fftw3 not found in /usr/lib
  fftw3 not found
  NOT AVAILABLE

fftw2_info:
  FOUND:
libraries = ['rfftw', 'fftw']
library_dirs = ['/usr/lib64']
define_macros = [('SCIPY_FFTW_H', None)]
include_dirs = ['/usr/include']

This was why I asked. :-)

> -jef



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 208737] Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208737





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:11 EST ---
Still no word from upstream? Would be good to get this imported and built... 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217311] Review Request: xarchiver - Archive manager for Xfce

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: xarchiver - Archive manager for Xfce


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217311





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:23 EST ---
Hey Patrice. Are you going to review this package? 
If not, I would be happy to do so, but it looks like you have already looked it
over quite a bit... ;) 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 190345] Review Request: vdr-femon - DVB frontend status monitor plugin for VDR

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: vdr-femon - DVB frontend status monitor plugin for VDR


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190345


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776  |163778
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:31 EST ---
I'd be happy to review this package. 
Look for a detailed review in a bit. 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 190345] Review Request: vdr-femon - DVB frontend status monitor plugin for VDR

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: vdr-femon - DVB frontend status monitor plugin for VDR


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190345


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 18:44 EST ---
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License (GPL)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
845886d484d998e79f997320f53bbf6d  vdr-femon-1.1.0.tgz
845886d484d998e79f997320f53bbf6d  vdr-femon-1.1.0.tgz.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane:

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
i386/x86_64 - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version

Issues:

I don't see any blockers here, so this package is APPROVED.

Don't forget to close this review request NEXTRELEASE once it's been
imported and built.

Also consider doing a review of another waiting package in
the review queue.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 216912] Review Request: rtpproxy - A symmetric RTP proxy

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: rtpproxy - A symmetric RTP proxy


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216912


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 19:05 EST ---
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License (BSD)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
2a316f4854da4e8c8d358c623e5ffdb6  rtpproxy-0.3.tar.gz
2a316f4854da4e8c8d358c623e5ffdb6  rtpproxy-0.3.tar.gz.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane:

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
i386/x86_64 - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version

Issues:

1. Is there anything aside from the including COPYING file to indicate
the license? I guess including that COPYING file might be enough, but there
is no mention anywhere in the code, web page or other files what the license is.
Perhaps you could report to upstream that they could be more explicit about the
license moving forward?

Otherwise I don't see any issues... this package is APPROVED. 

Don't forget to close this report NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and 
built. 

Also, do consider reviewing another waiting package to try and spread out the
reviewer load. 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 208737] Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208737





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 19:14 EST ---
I asked again, but no decision yet

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218195] Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, records, and objects.

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218195





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 19:22 EST ---
I take it you did your mock builds on 64bit hardware and had no weird problems
associated /usr/lib/ versus /usr/lib64 ?


-jef


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217311] Review Request: xarchiver - Archive manager for Xfce

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: xarchiver - Archive manager for Xfce


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217311





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 19:23 EST ---
I am indeed reviewing it, but I don't assign it to me
until I am ready to approve, because there is a disagreament
about the mimetypes, so if somebody disagrees with me on
that subject, I don't want to stop him from reviewing the
package. To summarize my position

* I don't want to accept the package with the mimetypes
  for lha and rar without further discussion
* the segfault with the .a is not a blocker to me for
  devel, but it is for other branches (it may open a 
  security risk).
* otherwise the package is right. #comment 10 is not
  blocking, it is more like suggestions for upstream.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 201502] Review Request: php-pear-PhpDocumentor

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: php-pear-PhpDocumentor
Alias: phpDocumentor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201502





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 19:58 EST ---
sorry this took so long.  I totally spaced :(

Anyways.

Building from the new spec, looks like the issues talked about previously have
been addressed.  rpmlint does complain a bit:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] php-pear-PhpDocumentor]$ rpmlint
php-pear-PhpDocumentor-1.3.0-0.3.fc5.src.rpm 
W: php-pear-PhpDocumentor no-%build-section

Easily rectifyable by including an empty %build section...

** phpdoc-1.3.0-0.3.fc5.noarch.rpm
== rpmlint
E: phpdoc subdir-in-bin /usr/bin/scripts/makedoc.sh
== provides
phpdoc = 1.3.0-0.3.fc5
== requires
/bin/bash  
/usr/bin/php  
php-pear(PhpDocumentor) = 1.3.0

provides/requires looks sane.  The error is well taken however; on examination
it would appear that /usr/bin/scripts is better placed in %doc.

** php-pear-PhpDocumentor-1.3.0-0.3.fc5.noarch.rpm
== rpmlint
== provides
php-pear(PhpDocumentor) = 1.3.0
php-pear-PhpDocumentor = 1.3.0-0.3.fc5
== requires
/bin/sh  
/bin/sh  
/usr/bin/pear  
/usr/bin/pear  
php-pear(PEAR)  
** php-pear-PhpDocumentor-docs-1.3.0-0.3.fc5.noarch.rpm
== rpmlint
W: php-pear-PhpDocumentor-docs wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/php-pear-PhpDocumentor-docs-1.3.0/Documentation/Release-old/Release-0.3.0
== provides
php-pear-PhpDocumentor-docs = 1.3.0-0.3.fc5
== requires
php-pear-PhpDocumentor = 1.3.0-0.3.fc5

Again, requires/provides look sane for both packages; the rpmlint warning is
well taken.  

I note the release is still in the "0.x" format...  Fine for now, but I trust
it'll be corrected before check-in.

So, address the rpmlint warnings/errors and the odd placement of scripts/, and
I'll approve.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218195] Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, records, and objects.

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218195





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 19:58 EST ---
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/scipy/scipy-0.5.1-4.fc6.i386.rpm
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/scipy/scipy-0.5.1-4.fc6.src.rpm
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/scipy/scipy.spec

These should address all the comments concerning the unnecessary explicit
requires, and builds against fftw instead of fftw2.

looking more closely at the rpmlint output, I'm getting errors mixed in with the
warnings of the form:
E: scipy non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/scipy/signal/setup.py 0644

There are a number of these and its all due to the existance of
#!/usr/bin/env python

at the top of each file. 

Should I take the time to patch this out to be correct for fedora and to adjust
permissions on these files accordingly.  The real problem is, is that many times
included python files are never meant to be run as executables even though they
have the /usr/bin/whatever header string.

-jef





-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218195] Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, records, and objects.

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: scipy - array processing for numbers, strings, 
records, and objects.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218195





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 20:07 EST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I take it you did your mock builds on 64bit hardware and had no weird 
problems
> associated /usr/lib/ versus /usr/lib64 ?

  I always use mock on 64 bits for that reason, and the fact that sitelib != 
sitearch (for python packages) as well.

> -jef

(In reply to comment #6)
> 
> These should address all the comments concerning the unnecessary explicit
> requires, and builds against fftw instead of fftw2.
> 
> looking more closely at the rpmlint output, I'm getting errors mixed in with 
the
> warnings of the form:
> E: scipy non-executable-script
> /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/scipy/signal/setup.py 0644
> 
> There are a number of these and its all due to the existance of
> #!/usr/bin/env python
> 
> at the top of each file. 
> 
> Should I take the time to patch this out to be correct for fedora and to 
adjust
> permissions on these files accordingly.  The real problem is, is that many 
times
> included python files are never meant to be run as executables even though 
they
> have the /usr/bin/whatever header string.

  To me those warnings are bogus since I agree with your analysis. I noticed 
them before, while doing the review, but I have ignored them on purpose.

> -jef



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 216912] Review Request: rtpproxy - A symmetric RTP proxy

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: rtpproxy - A symmetric RTP proxy


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216912


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 21:11 EST ---
Thanks for the review... imported and build for development kicked off...

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 217066] Review Request: python-gpod - A python module to access iPod content

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: python-gpod - A python module to access iPod content
Alias: python-gpod-review

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217066





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-03 21:15 EST ---
Thank you Kevin, for the review and sponsorship.  I'll move on to the next step
in the contributors guide and request membership in the cvsextras group.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218023] Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to spell words

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: alphabet-soup - Guide your worm through the soup to 
spell words
Alias: alphabet-soup

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218023


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-04 00:36 EST ---
Thanks! Imported and build requested, closing.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-04 02:12 EST ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> - /usr/share/mime
>   Requiring shared-mime-info should be the simplest.

Oh, requiring shared-mime-info is _mandatory_ as .pc file
requires it.

(In reply to comment #8)
> I'm not sure I've fixed the ownership issues correctly, please advise.
0.1.93-2 is okay.

Well, then
* %doc INSTALL
- This is not necessary because it is required for installing
  this package by himself.

Other things are okay.
-
  This package (chemical-mime-data) is APPROVED by me.
-

Please go forward according to 

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors

to import this package to Fedora Extras. I will sponsor
you when you have taken steps partway written in the page above
(then I should receive the mail that you need a sponsor)


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218256] New: Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218256

   Summary: Review Request:  - 
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: 
SRPM URL: 

Description: 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218210] Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: chemical-mime-data - Support for chemical/* MIME types


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218210





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-04 02:37 EST ---
Spec URL: http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/chemical-mime-data.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.republika.pl/belegdol/rpmstuff/chemical-mime-data-0.1.93-3.src.rpm
New release:
- Removed INSTALL from %doc

Thank you for sponsorship. I'll create the account now.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218172] Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gnome-chemistry-utils - A set of chemical utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218172


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163778  |163779
  nThis||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-04 02:44 EST ---
Okay.

-
  This package (gnome-chemistry-utils) is APPROVED by me.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 191218] Review Request: PyScript - Postscript graphics with Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: PyScript - Postscript graphics with Python


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191218





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-04 02:54 EST ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> I might be interested in being the primary maintainer of this package.  I
> believe that I can list you as co-maintainer so that you get bugzilla tickets.
> As things move forward, until there are more fine-grained access controls i 
can
> be the gatekeeper for any fedora extras cvs commits you want to make to the
> package.  You can build a public track-record of 'right action' by 
communicating
> with me through bugzilla and make it easier to gain contributor status.
That would be great!

> What is the most recent spec and srpm that I should look at.
See comment #7 for links to the current spec and srpm.

> And most importantly, has there been a previous review that would have counted
> as a full review if you hadn't needed sponsorship.  I want to see if I can
> contact a reviewer who is already looked at this so when I re submit it, we 
can
> streamline the timetable and get this in quickly.
The review is as documented in the early comments of this bug ticket.  The 
person who helped me was Sander Hoentjen, and we ironed out all the problems 
with the spec.  Everything seemed to be fine after that much review.

Thank you very much for your offer, and being co-maintainer would be a very 
good way to get any required changes into the package so that it can be 
included in Fedora Extras.

Paul

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 218258] New: Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.




https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218258

   Summary: Review Request:  - 
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: normal
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: 
SRPM URL: 

Description: 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review