[Bug 235456] Review Request: php-pear-HTML-QuickForm-advmultiselect - Element for HTML_QuickForm that emulate a multi-select

[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-HTML-QuickForm-advmultiselect - Element for 
HTML_QuickForm that emulate a multi-select


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235456





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-16 02:35 EST ---
It's been six weeks since Christopher offered sponsorship, but no response from
the submitter.  Is anything happening 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 216536] Review Request: FuzzyOcr - Checks for specific keywords in image attachments, using gocr

[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: FuzzyOcr - Checks for specific keywords in image 
attachments, using gocr


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216536





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-16 02:32 EST ---
Has there been any progress here?  If Orion no longer wants to drive this
submission, perhaps this ticket should be closed.  If someone else wants to
submit this package, they can open a separate ticket.

-- 
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 207805] Review Request: skey - An S/Key implementation

[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: skey - An S/Key implementation


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207805


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|normal  |medium




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-16 02:26 EST ---
So, anything happening 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines

[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: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing 
windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-16 02:17 EST ---
OK, now there are far fewer rpmlint complaints.  This exposes some things which
I perhaps simply didn't notice last time.  One trivial thing:
  W: cegui mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 17)
which is no big deal, and then a bunch of the dreaded rpath errors:
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUITGAImageCodec.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUILibxmlParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUIOpenGLRenderer.so.0.0.1 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUIExpatParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUITinyXMLParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUISILLYImageCodec.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUIDevILImageCodec.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUIFalagardWRBase.so.1.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUIXercesParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
   E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath 
/usr/lib64/libCEGUILuaScriptModule.so.1.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']

According to the package changelog, some work was done to get rid of rpath in
the past but I guess it hasn't survived into this rewrite.  I tried a few of the
usual things to deal with it (--disable-rpath, export LIBTOOL=libtool,
libtoolize) but none seemed to make any difference for whatever reason. 
However, doing
   make LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool
and deleting the resulting .a files got things working OK.

-- 
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 233425] Review Request: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab

[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: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233425





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-16 00:37 EST ---
Would you attach the test.java and test.java.orig on mockbuild x86_64?

-- 
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 244482] Review Request: telepathy-glib - glib bindings for telepathy

[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: telepathy-glib - glib bindings for telepathy


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244482


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: telepathy-  |Review Request: telepathy-
   |glib - glib bindings for|glib - glib bindings for
   |telepathy   |telepathy




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-16 00:13 EST ---
Isn't this a dup of bug 242790?

-- 
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 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX

[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: asterisk - The Open Source PBX


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:58 EST ---
Spec: 
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/development/SRPMS/asterisk-1.4.5-1.fc8.spec
SRPM:
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/development/SRPMS/asterisk-1.4.5-1.fc8.src.rpm

Update to 1.4.5.


-- 
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 244222] Review Request: perl-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing templates, and performing variable interpolation

[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-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing 
templates, and performing variable interpolation


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244222


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:51 EST ---
cvs done.

-- 
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 229323] Review Request: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool-II administration

[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: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool-II 
administration


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229323





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:46 EST ---
cvs done. 
No need to list yourself as owner and in CC. 
Also fedora-cvs should be set to ? for a request, and we set it to + when it's
processed. 

-- 
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 244333] Review Request: GConf2-dbus - D-Bus port of GConf2

[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: GConf2-dbus - D-Bus port of GConf2


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244333


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:44 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> 
> The obsolete and provides is still needed as we inherit from the F7 
> repository.
>  If you wish for me to version it what is the right format?

GConf2 is currently at 2.18.0.1-2.fc7, so it'll need to look like:

Provides: GConf2 = 2.18.0.1-3
Obsoletes: GConf2 <= 2.18.0.1-2

This will need manual updating if GConf2 is updated in F7, but is
necessary if we ever want to have a GConf2 package again.

> the -n after %setup is needed because if you look closely the package spits 
> out
> a GConf-%{version} directory not a GConf2-%{version} directory.  We use GConf2
> in the package name to be in sync with the GConf2 package which at one time 
> was
> parallel installable with GConf.  
> 
> As for the the package URL, GConf2-dbus has not been officaly released yet. 
> When it does it will be merged into GConf.  I have made it a seperate package
> because for the forseable future one may want to choose between installing the
> offical GConf2 or the embedable GConf2-dbus.  For instance when I create
> LiveCD's with full GNOME environments.

Looks like everything else is taken care of, so if you add the
versioned provides/obsoletes this is 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 225345] Review Request: kodos - Visual regular expression editor

[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: kodos - Visual regular expression editor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225345


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:41 EST ---
cvs done.

-- 
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 241903] Review Request: etherbat - Ethernet topology discovery

[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: etherbat - Ethernet topology discovery


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241903


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:34 EST ---
cvs done.

-- 
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 244262] Review Request: perl-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process stateful forms

[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-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process 
stateful forms
Alias: perl-CGI-FormBuilder

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244262





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:30 EST ---
Spec URL:
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/7/SRPMS/perl-CGI-FormBuilder-3.0501-3.fc7.spec
SRPM URL:
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/7/SRPMS/perl-CGI-FormBuilder-3.0501-3.fc7.src.rpm

Added BR perl(CGI::FastTemplate).

-- 
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 233425] Review Request: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab

[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: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233425





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:05 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157174)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157174&action=view)
mock: build log on x86_64

Failed to build on test.java from x86_64 arch.

-- 
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 244355] Review Request: xapian - Information Retrieval 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: xapian - Information Retrieval Library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244355





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 23:00 EST ---
Updated the source:

http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/xapian-core-1.0.1-1.src.rpm
http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/xapian-core.spec

-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 22:39 EST ---
Pushed patch 157170, fixed permissions. Should be all fixed:

http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/olpc-hardware-manager-0.4.1-3.fc7.src.rpm
http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/olpc-hardware-manager.spec

Thanks for the help!

-- 
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 243437] Review Request: gnome-specimen - A simple tool to view and compare fonts installed on your 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: gnome-specimen - A simple tool to view and compare 
fonts installed on your system


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243437





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 22:21 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157171)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157171&action=view)
patch: fix wrong entries from desktop file

note that your spec file need some improvment too.

1. move your desktop-file-install command in %%install stage
2. set your package as noarch package, its only contains code, no binaries.
--> in this case your python directory install need to be change to
%{python_sitelibs}
3. your package own other directories owned by other 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 244483] Review Request: telepathy-python- python bindings for telepathy

[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:  telepathy-python- python bindings for telepathy


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244483


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution||NOTABUG




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 21:58 EST ---
This is already in F7, though we could probably update it to a new version.
python-telepathy-0.13.8-1.fc7.noarch.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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 21:26 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157170)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157170&action=view)
Copy the COPYING file to somewhere that the doc macro can find it.


-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 21:25 EST ---
The COPYING file is there in the 2nd patch, I swear!

Hmmm I guess the COPYING file needs to go somewhere where the %doc macro can
actually find it

-- 
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 244222] Review Request: perl-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing templates, and performing variable interpolation

[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-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing 
templates, and performing variable interpolation


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244222


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 21:12 EST ---
Thanks for the review!

New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: perl-CGI-FastTemplate
Short Description: Perl extension for managing templates and performing variable
interpolation
Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Branches: FC-6 F-7 devel
InitialCC: 

-- 
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 244357] Review Request: pyxapian - Xapian python bindings

[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: pyxapian - Xapian python bindings


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244357





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 21:07 EST ---
Your snapshot date can't be right, 20071005 is in the future. You probably mean 
20070510.

-- 
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 244374] Review Request: xulrunner - XUL Runner

[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: xulrunner - XUL Runner


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244374





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 20:26 EST ---
>W: xulrunner no-documentation
>The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc).
>You have to include documentation files.

xulrunner has no docs. Same as firefox.

>E: xulrunner no-jar-manifest /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9a5pre/chrome/classic.jar
>The jar file does not contain a META-INF/MANIFEST file.

John is correct about this.

The other are fixed:

http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/xulrunner-1.9-2.a5pre.cvs20070519.1.src.rpm
http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/xulrunner.spec

-- 
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 244484] Review Request: perl-XML-SAX-ExpatXS - Perl SAX 2 XS extension to Expat parser

[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-XML-SAX-ExpatXS - Perl SAX 2 XS extension to 
Expat parser


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244484


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||244485
  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 244485] New: Review Request: perl-XML-Filter-ExceptionLocator - Filter to add line/col numbers to SAX errors

[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=244485

   Summary: Review Request: perl-XML-Filter-ExceptionLocator -
Filter to add line/col numbers to SAX errors
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
   URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/XML-Filter-ExceptionLocator/
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


SRPM URL: 
http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-XML-Filter-ExceptionLocator-1.00-1.fc6.src.rpm
SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-XML-Filter-ExceptionLocator.spec

Description:
This module implements a SAX filter which adds line-numbers and column-
numbers to errors generated by SAX handlers futher down the pipeline. I
wrote this module so that XML::Validator::Schema could blame the correct
line of XML for validation failures.

-- 
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 241549] Review Request: pixie - 3D renderer Renderman compliant

[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: pixie - 3D renderer Renderman compliant


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241549





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 20:03 EST ---
Well,

Same things with my main machine :(
it seem that we need a powerfull config to make this package build on x86_64.
Rebuilt on i386 and after few hour successfully done.

Nicolas, could you upload the build log from x86_64 ?

-- 
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 244484] New: Review Request: perl-XML-SAX-ExpatXS - Perl SAX 2 XS extension to Expat parser

[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=244484

   Summary: Review Request: perl-XML-SAX-ExpatXS - Perl SAX 2 XS
extension to Expat parser
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
   URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/XML-SAX-ExpatXS/
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


SRPM URL: 
http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-XML-SAX-ExpatXS-1.20-1.fc6.src.rpm
SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-XML-SAX-ExpatXS.spec

Description:
XML::SAX::ExpatXS is a direct XS extension to Expat XML parser. It
implements Perl SAX 2.1 interface.  Any deviations from the Perl
SAX 2.1 specification are considered as bugs.

See http://perl-xml.sourceforge.net/perl-sax for the Perl SAX API
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 233425] Review Request: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab

[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: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233425


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 19:56 EST ---
Starting review...

-- 
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 244483] New: Review Request: telepathy-python- python bindings for telepathy

[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=244483

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


Spec URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~johnp/telepathy-python.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://people.freedesktop.org/~johnp/telepathy-python-0.13.11-1.src.rpm
Description: Telepathy-python is the python bindings for the telepathy unified 
framework for all forms of real time conversations, including instant 
messaging, IRC, voice calls and video calls.

This should be added to F-7 and OLPC-2 branches

-- 
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 228214] Review Request: poco - C++ POrtable COmponents framework

[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: poco - C++ POrtable COmponents framework


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228214


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
   Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]
   ||.net)




-- 
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 244482] New: Review Request: telepathy-glib - glib bindings for telepathy

[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=244482

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


Spec URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~johnp/telepathy-glib.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~johnp/telepathy-glib-0.5.11-1.src.rpm
Description: Telepathy-glib is the glib bindings for the telepathy unified 
framework for all forms of real time conversations, including instant 
messaging, IRC, voice calls and video calls.

This should be added to F-7 and OLPC-2 branches

-- 
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 244478] New: Review Request: qt4-theme-quarticurve - Unofficial port of the Bluecurve widget theme to Qt 4

[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=244478

   Summary: Review Request: qt4-theme-quarticurve - Unofficial port
of the Bluecurve widget theme to Qt 4
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: http://repo.calcforge.org/f8/qt4-theme-quarticurve.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://repo.calcforge.org/f8/qt4-theme-quarticurve-0.0-0.1.beta3.fc7.src.rpm
Description:
Quarticurve is an unofficial port of Red Hat's Bluecurve Qt 3 widget theme
(taken out of redhat-artwork 5.0.12) to Qt 4. This port is NOT endorsed or
supported by Red Hat.

This will become particularly useful for Fedora 8 when KDE 4 will (hopefully) 
become the default, but I'm planning to push this to F7 and FE6 too.

I also have a KWin theme ready, but that can't get in before the KDE 4 version 
of KWin does. :-)

I hope the way "Bluecurve" is referred to is fair use of the trademark, 
otherwise I'm willing to work out something with Red Hat. Upsetting Red Hat 
really isn't the goal here. ;-)

rpmlint reports no warnings except those harmless ones for the debuginfo 
package:
W: qt4-theme-quarticurve-debuginfo hidden-file-or-dir 
/usr/src/debug/quarticurve-beta3/.moc
W: qt4-theme-quarticurve-debuginfo hidden-file-or-dir 
/usr/src/debug/quarticurve-beta3/.moc

And in case that it isn't obvious, the Contribution here is supposed to be the 
packaging, not the upstream source code, even though I happen to be upstream. 
(The upstream code is GPL v2, so no licensing issues there.)

-- 
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 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment

[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: sugar - OLPC desktop environment


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 18:53 EST ---
marco, please add those and hold off building until I get gstreamer-base-plugins
compiled into our repo

-- 
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 244374] Review Request: xulrunner - XUL Runner

[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: xulrunner - XUL Runner


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244374





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 18:49 EST ---
I would say the jar file errors are all an upstream issue (or xulrunner just
doesn't need them in their jar format).  These are not general purpose jar files
and are internal to xulrunner.  They should not be blockers.  The rest is easy
to fix.

-- 
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 244333] Review Request: GConf2-dbus - D-Bus port of GConf2

[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: GConf2-dbus - D-Bus port of GConf2


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244333





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 18:36 EST ---
Spec URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~johnp/GConf2-dbus.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~johnp/GConf2-dbus-2.16.0-11.src.rpm

The obsolete and provides is still needed as we inherit from the F7 repository.
 If you wish for me to version it what is the right format?

the -n after %setup is needed because if you look closely the package spits out
a GConf-%{version} directory not a GConf2-%{version} directory.  We use GConf2
in the package name to be in sync with the GConf2 package which at one time was
parallel installable with GConf.  

As for the the package URL, GConf2-dbus has not been officaly released yet. 
When it does it will be merged into GConf.  I have made it a seperate package
because for the forseable future one may want to choose between installing the
offical GConf2 or the embedable GConf2-dbus.  For instance when I create
LiveCD's with full GNOME environments.

-- 
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 199905] Review Request: gotmail

[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: gotmail


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199905


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO|163776, 177841  |201449
  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 199905] Review Request: gotmail

[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: gotmail


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199905


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NOTABUG




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 18:24 EST ---
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 225038] Review Request: medit - Another very nice Gtk+ text editor

[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: medit - Another very nice Gtk+ text editor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225038


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||201449
  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 244262] Review Request: perl-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process stateful forms

[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-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process 
stateful forms
Alias: perl-CGI-FormBuilder

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244262





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 17:28 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Updated BR's and licese.  I didn't BR perl(CGI::FastTemplate) because
> that's under review in bug 244222.

Ahh, in that case, it should be br'd here and this bug marked as depending on
the review bug for CGI::FastTemplate...  That way everything gets reviewed in
the right order.


-- 
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 229321] Review Request :postgresql-pgpool-II : 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 :postgresql-pgpool-II : Connection pooling/replication 
server for PostgreSQL


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229321





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 17:27 EST ---
Hello,

Good point, but I think we should just obsolete postgresql-pgpool. pgpool-II and
pgpool (-I) should not be run at the same server --pgpool-II can do what pgpool
can do, plus it has some other features.

If adding a Obsoletes: is ok for everyone, I'll go with it.

Regards, Devrim

-- 
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 229323] Review Request: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool-II administration

[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: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool-II 
administration


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229323


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: postgresql- |Review Request: postgresql-
   |pgpoolAdmin - web-based |pgpoolAdmin - web-based
   |pgpool administration   |pgpool-II administration




-- 
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 229323] Review Request: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool administration

[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: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool 
administration


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229323


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 17:22 EST ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin
Short Description: Web based pgpool-II administration
Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Branches: EL-4 EL-5 FC-6 F-7
InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
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 212003] Review Request: mugshot - Companion software for mugshot.org

[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: mugshot - Companion software for mugshot.org


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212003





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 16:49 EST ---
(Either someone got to this very quickly but hasn't cleared the flag yet, or
I somehow got confused and was unable to type cvs up correctly earlier.
A branch seems to exist 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 243573] Review Request: python-memcached - A Python memcached client 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: python-memcached - A Python memcached client library.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243573


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




-- 
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 239936] Review Request: oyranos - The Oyranos Colour Management System (CMS)

[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: oyranos - The Oyranos Colour Management System (CMS)


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239936


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:49 EST ---
Some random notes:

* Please make the compile log more verbose
* Add 'INSTALL="%{__install} -p" to make install
* What rpm own %{syscolordir}?
  (Please check directories' ownership)
* While %syscolordir is used, %{_datadir}/color/ is also used
  in spec file
* Is the definition %usercolordir needed (for this spec file)?
  (and there seems to be other unused macros)
* %configure already uses --libdir=%_libdir
* For make install:

make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install install_gui

  This will be sufficient.
* Would you tell me what %post script actually does?
  (especially, does %post script change some files?)

(In reply to comment #1)
> Some updates (remaining rpaths)
* Would you tell me what rpath issues remain? (mock build log
  may be useful)

* For %clean: why do you have to remove __doc directory explicitly?



-- 
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 243019] Review Request: perl-IO-Compress-Zlib - IO::Compress interface to zip and gzip data

[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-IO-Compress-Zlib - IO::Compress interface to zip 
and gzip data


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243019


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
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 243019] Review Request: perl-IO-Compress-Zlib - IO::Compress interface to zip and gzip data

[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-IO-Compress-Zlib - IO::Compress interface to zip 
and gzip data


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243019


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 14:15 EST ---
I tried enabling all of the tests by setting COMPRESS_ZLIB_RUN_ALL, but that
results in additional build dependencies and eventually you find that you need
Compress:Zlib 2.0 or greater, which kind of results in a recursion error.  I
guess that if you really wanted to run ALL of the tests, you could get
everything updated and then come back to this package and turn them on.

rpmlint has only one complaint:
   W: perl-IO-Compress-Zlib mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: 
  line 16)
I've never really cared about these; fix it if you like.

* source files match upstream:
   118d06d9c0c528aff68da9f92d64fdb4bdb0f880e37c9887f624a1a1b7c0d82d  
   IO-Compress-Zlib-2.004.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint output is OK.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   perl(IO::Compress::Adapter::Deflate) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Adapter::Identity) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Deflate) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Gzip) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Gzip::Constants) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::RawDeflate) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Zip) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Zip::Constants) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Zlib::Constants) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Zlib::Extra) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Adapter::Identity) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Adapter::Inflate) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::AnyInflate) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Gunzip) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Inflate) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::RawInflate) = 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Unzip) = 2.004
   perl-IO-Compress-Zlib = 2.004-1.fc8
  =
   perl >= 0:5.004
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(Compress::Raw::Zlib) >= 2.004
   perl(Exporter)
   perl(IO::Compress::Adapter::Deflate) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Adapter::Identity) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Base) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Base::Common) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Gzip::Constants) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::RawDeflate) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Zip::Constants) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Zlib::Constants) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Compress::Zlib::Extra) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Seekable)
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Adapter::Identity) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Adapter::Inflate) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Base) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Gunzip) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Inflate) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::RawInflate) >= 2.004
   perl(IO::Uncompress::Unzip) >= 2.004
   perl(Time::Local)
   perl(bytes)
   perl(constant)
   perl(strict)
   perl(warnings)
* %check is present and all tests pass:
   All tests successful, 2 tests and 8 subtests skipped.
   Files=60, Tests=38644, 53 wallclock secs (30.66 cusr +  3.36 csys = 34.02 
CPU)
   The skipped tests:
  t/020isize..skipped
all skipped: Lengthy Tests Disabled
(These would require Compress::Zlib 2 to run anyway)
  t/105oneshot-deflateok
2/970 skipped: readonly + threads
  t/105oneshot-gzip...ok
2/970 skipped: readonly + threads
  t/105oneshot-rawdeflate.ok
2/970 skipped: readonly + threads
  t/105oneshot-zipok
2/970 skipped: readonly + threads
  t/109merge-zip..skipped
all skipped: not implemented yet
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

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.re

[Bug 243665] Review Request: perl-Geo-IP - Efficient GeoIP bindings for Perl

[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-Geo-IP - Efficient GeoIP bindings for Perl


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243665





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 14:24 EST ---
Heh, you beat me to this.  I just used cpanspec to generate mine.

Some comments:

License is GPL or Artistic, not GPL, at least according to my reading of the
README file.

I referenced the module in the ususl CPAN locations:

URL:http://search.cpan.org/dist/Geo-IP/
Source0:   
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/T/TJ/TJMATHER/Geo-IP-%{version}.tar.gz

I guess it doesn't really matter either way, but CPAN is usually the canonical
location for Perl modules.

Please remove the "mf" from Release:.

When adding Perl module dependencies, please depend on the perl() symbol and not
the package name: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker).  There is no guarantee that the
module will stay in a separate package.

The package has a test suite; any reason for not running it?

Any reason not to package the example directory as documentation?

-- 
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 226276] Merge Review: perl

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Merge Review: perl


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226276


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 14:15 EST ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> IMO, this perl-libs package (the libperl.so split out) is completely useless
> and doesn't solve anything, because the main perl package is i386 arch'ed and
> filled with i386 deps.
> 
> I strongly recommend to revert this change.

Since the debate above is still unclear:

Some of my packages can't be rpmbuilt properly till the end. At %files they
fails with 
/usr/bin/perl: error while loading shared libraries: libperl.so: cannot open
shared object file: No such file or directory
getOutputFrom(): Broken pipe

So since libperl.so is in perl-libs (on moonshine), will perl-libs be a
dependency on perl or will it be strictly independent of perl ?

-- 
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 225038] Review Request: medit - Another very nice Gtk+ text editor

[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: medit - Another very nice Gtk+ text editor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225038


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEEDINFO|CLOSED
 Resolution||WONTFIX
   Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]|
   |m)  |




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:59 EST ---
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 243695] Review Request: perl-Crypt-Simple - Encrypt stuff simply

[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-Crypt-Simple - Encrypt stuff simply


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243695


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: perl-Crypt- |Review Request: perl-Crypt-
   |Simple - Encrypt stuff  |Simple - Encrypt stuff
   |simply  |simply




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 14:47 EST ---
This fails to build for me in rawhide; you'll need at least a build dependency
on perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) and from looking at the tests, you'll want
perl(Test::More) and probably perl(Test).  (Although the base Perl packate still
provides the latter, there's no guarantee that it will continue to do so.)

-- 
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 244222] Review Request: perl-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing templates, and performing variable interpolation

[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-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing 
templates, and performing variable interpolation


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244222


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
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 244262] Review Request: perl-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process stateful forms

[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-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process 
stateful forms
Alias: perl-CGI-FormBuilder

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244262





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 14:39 EST ---
Spec URL:
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/development/SRPMS/perl-CGI-FormBuilder-3.0501-2.fc8.spec
SRPM URL:
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/development/SRPMS/perl-CGI-FormBuilder-3.0501-2.fc8.src.rpm

Updated BR's and licese.  I didn't BR perl(CGI::FastTemplate) because
that's under review in bug 244222.



-- 
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 243665] Review Request: perl-Geo-IP - Efficient GeoIP bindings for Perl

[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-Geo-IP - Efficient GeoIP bindings for Perl


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243665


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
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 244222] Review Request: perl-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing templates, and performing variable interpolation

[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-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing 
templates, and performing variable interpolation


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244222





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 14:41 EST ---
Spec URL:
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/development/SRPMS/perl-CGI-FastTemplate-1.09-2.fc8.spec
SRPM URL:
http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/development/SRPMS/perl-CGI-FastTemplate-1.09-2.fc8.src.rpm

Updated BR's and license.


-- 
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 243695] Review Request: perl-Crypt-Simple - Encrypt stuff simply

[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-Crypt-Simple - Encrypt stuff simply


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243695


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
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 229321] Review Request :postgresql-pgpool-II : 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 :postgresql-pgpool-II : Connection pooling/replication 
server for PostgreSQL


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229321





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 14:28 EST ---
I can't believe I didn't catch this.  

My recommendation would be to rename /u/b/pgbool to /u/b/pgpool-II and patch the
rest to accommodate.

-- 
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 212003] Review Request: mugshot - Companion software for mugshot.org

[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: mugshot - Companion software for mugshot.org


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212003


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 16:33 EST ---
An F-7 branch is needed for mugshot.


-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 15:45 EST ---
Needs to require dbus-python and pygobject2.

I would recommend using "install -p -D -m 0755" to install the files
rather than "mkdir -p && cp".

Pointers to somewhere where the code can be downloaded so that the
files can in the SRPM can be compared.  The OLPC git web interface
doesn't work well for raw access to the files, so maybe a short script
that uses git to clone the repo and check out the proper revision
would work.

W: olpc-hardware-manager no-documentation

Should at least include a copy of the GPL.

W: olpc-hardware-manager non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/dbus-1/system.d/olpc-hardware-manager.conf

Ignore.

W: olpc-hardware-manager incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.3.1-1 0.4.1-1.fc8

Needs updated changelog entry.

W: olpc-hardware-manager service-default-enabled 
/etc/init.d/olpc-hardware-manager

Probably OK for OLPC but if this package is branched for Fedora it
should not be started by default.

W: olpc-hardware-manager no-reload-entry /etc/init.d/olpc-hardware-manager

Probably OK.

W: olpc-hardware-manager strange-permission olpc-hardware-manager 0755
W: olpc-hardware-manager strange-permission hardwaremanager.py 0755

My preference would be to store the files mode 0644 and then to change
the permissions when installing.

E: olpc-hardware-manager no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install

Add a "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT"

W: olpc-hardware-manager no-%prep-section
W: olpc-hardware-manager no-%build-section

Add empty 

W: olpc-hardware-manager mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 12, tab: 
line 1)

Easily fixed.

I'll upload some patches to fix some of these (and email them to the submitter).

-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 15:46 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157147)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157147&action=view)
Differences between spec file in upstream git repo and what was submitted.


-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 15:48 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157149)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157149&action=view)
More changes to get spec to comply with Fedora standards.


-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 15:47 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157148)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157148&action=view)
Changes to bring RPM packaging into line with Fedora guidelines.


-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 15:48 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157150)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157150&action=view)
Add requires for dbus-python and pygobject2


-- 
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 244355] Review Request: xapian - Information Retrieval 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: xapian - Information Retrieval Library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244355





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 15:47 EST ---
Sure, sounds good, I didn't know there was a release, I'll update the source.

-- 
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 244222] Review Request: perl-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing templates, and performing variable interpolation

[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-CGI-FastTemplate - Perl extension for managing 
templates, and performing variable interpolation


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244222


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 16:10 EST ---
Not much to say here; builds fine and rpmlint is quiet.

I guess if I really wanted to pick nits, there's a comma fault in Summary.

* source files match upstream:
   7d9d6b57bef2c3a33142c4cf0ca07d8801575e53b7f054b83df9f616bd2a7773  
   CGI-FastTemplate-1.09.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   perl(CGI::FastTemplate)
   perl-CGI-FastTemplate = 1.09-2.fc8
  =
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(strict)
* %check is present and all tests pass:
   All tests successful.
   Files=5, Tests=10,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.05 cusr +  0.05 csys =  0.10 CPU)
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines

[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: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing 
windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
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 243571] Review Request: python-mechanoid - Python Programmatic Web Browser

[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-mechanoid - Python Programmatic Web Browser


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243571


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




-- 
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 244370] Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager

[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: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 16:15 EST ---
I applied your patches, thanks!

There is a problem though:

+ cp -pr COPYING
/var/tmp/olpc-hardware-manager-0.4.1-2.fc7-root-marco/usr/share/doc/olpc-hardware-manager-0.4.1
cp: cannot stat `COPYING': No such file or directory

Suggestions or patches are welcome :)


-- 
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 230549] Review Request: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend

[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: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230549


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:41 EST ---
yeah, it seem that some packages skipped some packaging policies or have been
imported before the heavly edit that the packaging guidelines has had. :)



==
** 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 244356] Review Request: xapian-bindings - Bindings for Xapian

[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: xapian-bindings - Bindings for Xapian


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244356


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:42 EST ---
For the same reasons as for bug#244355, please package Xapian 1.0.1 instead.

-- 
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 240793] Review Request: libhdhomerun - tools for the Silicon Dust HDHomeRun

[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: libhdhomerun - tools for the Silicon Dust HDHomeRun


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240793


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: libhdhomerun|Review Request: libhdhomerun
   |- tools for the Silicon Dust|- tools for the Silicon Dust
   |HDHomeRun   |HDHomeRun




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:39 EST ---
While the upstream tarball is called "libhdhomerun" there isn't really a library
produced.  That's why I chose to call the package that I put together 
"hdhomerun".

Also, I'm not sure how useful it is at this point to install the header files
into a -devel subpackage because there's no library to link against.

-- 
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 244355] Review Request: xapian - Information Retrieval 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: xapian - Information Retrieval Library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244355





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:35 EST ---
It's certainly appreciated that you're trying to get xapian packages into
fedora, but please package Xapian 1.0.1 rather than what appears to be a rather
old SVN snapshot (from the SVN revision in the version string).

1.0.1 is more stable, and has an API and ABI that should remain compatible for
some time, which is better for users and for yourself as package maintainer. 
Users reporting problems with packages of old SVN snapshots won't get much
sympathy upstream - they'll just be directed to the unofficial RPMs.

So do yourself, your users, and upstream a favour and package the latest
released version!


-- 
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 240793] Review Request: libhdhomerun - tools for the Silicon Dust HDHomeRun

[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: libhdhomerun - tools for the Silicon Dust HDHomeRun 


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240793


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:27 EST ---
*** Bug 243704 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
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 243704] Review Request: hdhomerun - Command line client for HDHomeRun network tuners

[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: hdhomerun - Command line client for HDHomeRun network 
tuners


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243704


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:27 EST ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 240793 ***

-- 
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 229321] Review Request :postgresql-pgpool-II : 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 :postgresql-pgpool-II : Connection pooling/replication 
server for PostgreSQL


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229321





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:23 EST ---
Has this been fixed yet?

postgresql-pgpool - 3.2-1.fc7.i386
  File conflict with: postgresql-pgpool-II - 1.1-1.fc8.i386
 /usr/bin/pgpool

postgresql-pgpool-II - 1.1-1.fc8.i386
  File conflict with: postgresql-pgpool - 3.2-1.fc7.i386
 /usr/bin/pgpool


-- 
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 229323] Review Request: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool administration

[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: postgresql-pgpoolAdmin - web-based pgpool 
administration


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229323


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 13:02 EST ---
rpmlint now clean, save the acceptible error above.
Package and spec names are good.
Meets packaging guidelines.
Not sure what to make of the licensing.  Spec says BSD, license appears BSD-ish.
 Might want to run it by spot but I think it's OK.
Spec is legible American English.
Source md5 matches.
Builds on i386/f7.
BuildRequires are good.
Locales OK.
No libraries, not relocatable.
Owns all created dirs.
No duplicate files or incorrect permissions.
%clean present and correct.
Macros sane.
Code, not content.
No large docs or runtime doc deps.
No headers, .pc or .la.
No subpackages.
Not a gui app.
No known conflicts. (Don't forget to fix postgresql-pgpool-II, BTW :))
Install starts by clearing buildroot.
All filenames UTF8.


All MUSTs met.

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 226135] Merge Review: memtest86+

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Merge Review: memtest86+


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226135


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|normal  |medium

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE




-- 
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 224245] Merge Review: squirrelmail

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Merge Review: squirrelmail


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224245


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 12:57 EST ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the new owner of squirrelmail.


-- 
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 225522] Review Request: cinepaint - CinePaint is a tool for manipulating images

[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: cinepaint - CinePaint is a tool for manipulating images


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225522





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 12:53 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157132)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157132&action=view)
Proposed patch

Would you try the patch attached with
* sed -i.rpath 's|^runpath_var=LD_RUN_PATH|runpath_var=DIE_RPATH_DIE|g' libtool

  _enabled_
* explicit call of chrpath all removed
?

-- 
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 243704] Review Request: hdhomerun - Command line client for HDHomeRun network tuners

[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: hdhomerun - Command line client for HDHomeRun network 
tuners


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243704





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 12:45 EST ---
Isn't this a dup of bug 240793?

-- 
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 199905] Review Request: gotmail

[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: gotmail


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199905





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 12:35 EST ---
So perhaps we should go ahead and close this.  When it's ready, feel free to go
ahead and submit GetLive in another ticket if you like.

I'll go ahead and close this out in a week unless someone indicates that I
shouldn't.  Or James can close it whenever he wishes.

-- 
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 243571] Review Request: python-mechanoid - Python Programmatic Web Browser

[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-mechanoid - Python Programmatic Web Browser


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243571





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 12:31 EST ---
Please don't forget to close this ticket once the package has been 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 239165] Review Request: tcptraceroute - A traceroute implementation using TCP packets

[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: tcptraceroute - A traceroute implementation using TCP 
packets


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239165


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 12:31 EST ---
OK, the libnet maintainer has no interest in allowing libnet to be dynamic, so
there's nothing you can do.  It looks like everything will just sort itself with
a rebuild if libnet magically becomes dynamic in the future.  So I think we're
done here.

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 230549] Review Request: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend

[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: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230549





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 11:56 EST ---
Oh! I looked at the rhythmbox file, and it has "Application" :-/
I've removed it and overwrote the last .src.rpm, as it's such a small change.

-- 
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 230549] Review Request: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend

[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: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230549





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 11:51 EST ---
[in reply to comment #10]
[...] since this is an
application meant to be run instead of a window or desktop manager,[...]

I meant that desktop file can be set as optional for this package.
but it's nice to add one all the same.

> Now about libjsw : I started looking at it... and it scared me away. The 
> current
> sources are a big fat mess, and are really hard to package cleanly (optflags
> IIRC). 

Ho hell you right ;)



Just quick note:

Category "Application" should be remove from desktop entry.


-- 
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 233425] Review Request: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab

[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: mecab-java - Java binding for MeCab


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233425


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |medium
   Priority|normal  |medium




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 11:17 EST ---
mecab is updated to 0.96.

http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/Fedora/development/SPECS/mecab-java.spec
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/Fedora/development/SRPMS/mecab-java-0.96-1.fc8.src.rpm
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/Fedora/development/LOGS/MOCK-mecab-java.log

-- 
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 244411] Review Request: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned rpm packages

[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: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned rpm packages


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244411





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 11:09 EST ---
I think that is good to have a tool that doesn't depend on yum, eg: people 
using apt or smart would appreciate it (imho) :-)

-- 
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 244411] Review Request: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned rpm packages

[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: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned rpm packages


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244411





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 10:58 EST ---
Does this do anything that "package-cleanup --leaves" doesn't do?

(package-cleanup is in the yum-utils 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 226190] Merge Review: netatalk

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Merge Review: netatalk


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226190





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 10:53 EST ---
Perhaps we could finish the review before closing this ticket?

What did you think of the patch I attached in comment #4?  What about the static
libraries?  (BTW, the guidelines relating to static libraries have changed; you
can include them as long as you can explain why they're 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 244355] Review Request: xapian - Information Retrieval 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: xapian - Information Retrieval Library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244355





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 10:42 EST ---
I fixed all the comments except:

> can't find which rpm owns /usr/include/xapian directory

It's owned by xapian-devel I think, maybe I'm missing what is the problem 
exactly.

http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/xapian-core-0.9.10-2.2.svn8397.fc7.src.rpm
http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/xapian-core.spec

rpmlint report just this now:

W: xapian-core-libs no-documentation

I think that's fine, the docs are in xapian-core.

-- 
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 244262] Review Request: perl-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process stateful forms

[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-CGI-FormBuilder - Easily generate and process 
stateful forms
Alias: perl-CGI-FormBuilder

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244262


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Alias||perl-CGI-FormBuilder




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 10:35 EST ---
Hey Jeff -- couple quick spec notes:

BR'ing perl is ok, but depreciated if you don't need to specify a specific
version of perl (e.g. 1:5.006).

BR'ing perl-devel is strongly discouraged, even if wrapped in a conditional (and
if I were doing a full review right now I would consider it a blocker). 
Instead, the canonical approach is to add BR's on certain core modules that have
been deemed devel and split off: See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Perl#requiresandprovides. 

The README notes the license as standard perl, that is "GPL or Artistic", but
your spec notes the license as just GPL.

There are a number of "optional" modules noted in Makefile.PL; maybe they're not
needed for build but it looks to be that the tests will require them, e.g.:

2d-template-fastok   
4/4 skipped: skip: CGI::FastTemplate not installed 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 225345] Review Request: kodos - Visual regular expression editor

[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: kodos - Visual regular expression editor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225345


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 10:32 EST ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: kodos
Short Description: Visual regular expression editor
Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Branches: FC-6 F-7 EL-5
InitialCC: 

-- 
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 244411] Review Request: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned rpm packages

[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: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned rpm packages


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244411


[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 244411] New: Review Request: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned rpm packages

[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=244411

   Summary: Review Request: rpmorphan - rpmorphan list the orphaned
rpm packages
   Product: Fedora Extras
   Version: devel
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: low
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com


Spec URL: http://rpm.arbiterlab.net/SPECS/rpmorphan.spec
SRPM URL: http://rpm.arbiterlab.net/SRPMS/rpmorphan-1.0-1.fc7.src.rpm
Description: rpmorphan  finds  "orphaned"  packages  on  your system. It 
determines
which packages have no other packages depending on their installation,
and shows you a list of these packages.
It intends to be clone of deborphan debian tools for rpm packages.

It will try to help you to remove unused packages, for exemple :
- after a distribution upgrade
- when you want to suppress packages after some tests

~ Side notes ~~~
 - First Package
 - Looking for 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 226294] Merge Review: php

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Merge Review: php
Alias: php

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226294


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |medium
   Priority|normal  |medium




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 09:57 EST ---
For comment #11 :

> Enabling mhash, mcrypt and tidy is something that can only happen *after* the
merge not before.

The merge is done.

Since "freetds" is in Fedora, mssql can be enabled now, i.e.:
dbase, mhash, mcrypt, mssql, tidy

I feel that users want to have php-mssql immediately now. I already add it for
FC6 (in my php-extras package), but what is the best way for F7 and further?
Either I rebuild php-extras in F7 with mssql support, or maybe wait a little and
merge all 5 subpackages with the main php ?

Any thoughts?


-- 
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 226294] Merge Review: php

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Merge Review: php
Alias: php

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226294


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Attachment #148354|0   |1
is obsolete||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 10:01 EST ---
(From update of attachment 148354)
brroken patch, due to "/opt/interbase" ?...
And not all 5 sub-packages present.


-- 
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 244357] Review Request: pyxapian - Xapian python bindings

[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: pyxapian - Xapian python bindings


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244357





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 09:49 EST ---
Full review follows, executive review: needs some work...

 1 - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be
   posted in the review.

W: pyxapian no-documentation

Would at least be nice to have a copy of the GPL.

E: pyxapian non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/lemur/xapian/sei.py 0644
E: pyxapian non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/lemur/xapian/highlight.py 0644

This can be fixed with something like:

%{__sed} -i -e '/^#!/,1d' src/lemur/xapian/sei.py src/lemur/xapian/highlight.py

E: pyxapian no-changelogname-tag
E: pyxapian no-changelogname-tag

Needs a changelog!

 2 - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
   Guidelines.

OK

 3 - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in
   the format %{name}.spec

OK

 4 - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.

This is no longer required (automatically determined by RPM):

Requires:   python-abi = %{pyver}

Buildroot is incorrect, need to at least add %{revision}.

%files can be simplified to:

%{python_sitelib}/*

The %pyver macro can be deleted as well.

Needs a changelog!

 5 - MUST: The package must be licensed with an open-source compatible
   license and meet other legal requirements as defined in the
   legal section of Packaging Guidelines.

OK (GPL)

 6 - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the
   actual license.

OK

 7 - MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of
   the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing
   the text of the license(s) for the package must be included
   in %doc.

OK (License not included)

 8 - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.

OK

 9 - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the
   reviewer is unable to read the spec file, it will be
   impossible to perform a review.  Fedora is not the place
   for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest ([WWW]
   http://www.ioccc.org/).

OK

10 - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the
   upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers
   should use md5sum for this task.

The source is not specified by URL, and there is no matching tarball
found at the project homepage.  Either a URL from where the tarball
can be downloaded must be provided or instructions need to be provided
on how to recreate the tarball.

11 - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary
   rpms on at least one supported architecture.

OK (F-7/i386)

12 - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work
   on an architecture, then those architectures should be
   listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed
   in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed in bugzilla,
   describing the reason that the package does not
   compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number
   should then be placed in a comment, next to the
   corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have
   bugzilla entries during the review process, so they should
   put this description in the comment until the package is
   approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the
   long explanation with the bug number. (Extras Only) The bug
   should be marked as blocking one (or more) of the following
   bugs to simplify tracking such issues...

OK (noarch package)

13 - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires,
   except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of
   Packaging Guidelines; inclusion of those as BuildRequires
   is optional. Apply common sense.

OK

14 - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by
   using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
   forbidden.

OK (no language-specific files)

15 - MUST: If the package contains shared library files located in the
   dynamic linker's default paths, that package must call
   ldconfig in %post and %postun. If the package has multiple
   subpackages with libraries, each subpackage should also
   have a %post/%postun section that calls /sbin/ldconfig. An
   example of the correct syntax for this is...

OK (no shared library files)

16 - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager
   must state this fact in the request for review, along with
   the 

[Bug 239939] Review Request: libgii - General Graphics Interface toolkit

[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: libgii - General Graphics Interface toolkit


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239939





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 09:33 EST ---
Ping? :-)

-- 
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 230549] Review Request: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend

[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: oxine - Lightweight, purely OSD based xine frontend


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230549





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-06-15 09:30 EST ---
Spec URL: http://ftp.es6.freshrpms.net/tmp/extras/oxine/oxine.spec
SRPM URL: http://ftp.es6.freshrpms.net/tmp/extras/oxine/oxine-0.6.6-3.src.rpm

* Fri Jun 15 2007 Matthias Saou  0.6.6-3
- Include desktop entry and icon based on a CD image from the default theme.

-- 
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