[Bug 459073] Review Request: iok - Indic onscreen virtual keyboard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459073 --- Comment #5 from Parag AN(पराग) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 03:27:21 EDT --- Jens, Thanks for your suggestions. Here is updated package Spec URL: http://paragn.fedorapeople.org/iok/iok.spec SRPM URL: http://paragn.fedorapeople.org/iok/iok-1.0.8-1.fc9.src.rpm Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=799289 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460779] Review Request: nekovm - Neko embedded scripting language and virtual machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460779 --- Comment #2 from Dan Horák <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 03:52:41 EDT --- - build in Rawhide/x86_64 fails (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=799312) - maybe BR: sqlite-devel is missing? - Fedora's CFLAGS are not used, could be solved with using "make CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -I vm -D_GNU_SOURCE"" for building - what about 64-bit compatibility - I see "CFLAGS += -D_64BITS" in the Makefile? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460867] Package review: perl-ORLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460867 Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||457517 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457517] Review Request: perl-Padre - Perl Application Development and Refactoring Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457517 Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||460867 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460867] New: Package review: perl-ORLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package review: perl-ORLite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460867 Summary: Package review: perl-ORLite Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-ORLite/perl-ORLi te-0.10-1.fc9.src.rpm OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora DESCRIPTION THIS CODE IS EXPERIMENTAL AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED! SQLite is a light weight single file SQL database that provides an excellent platform for embedded storage of structured data. However, while it is superficially similar to a regular server-side SQL database, SQLite has some significant attributes that make using it like a traditional database difficult. For example, SQLite is extremely fast to connect to compared to server databases (1000 connections per second is not unknown) and is particularly bad at concurrency, as it can only lock transactions at a database-wide level. This role as a superfast internal data store can clash with the roles and designs of traditional object-relational modules like Class::DBI or DBIx::Class. What this situation would seem to need is an object-relation system that is designed specifically for SQLite and is aligned with its idiosyncracies. ORLite is an object-relation system specifically for SQLite that follows many of the same principles as the ::Tiny series of modules and has a design that aligns directly to the capabilities of SQLite. Further documentation will be available at a later time, but the synopsis gives a pretty good idea of how it will work. http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-ORLite/perl-ORLite-0.10-1.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460867] Package review: perl-ORLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460867 Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|457517 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457517] Review Request: perl-Padre - Perl Application Development and Refactoring Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457517 Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|460867 | --- Comment #3 from Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 04:04:59 EDT --- Update to new version http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/Padre/perl-Padre-0.06-1.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460870] New: Need a CVS EPEL branch for gnumeric
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Need a CVS EPEL branch for gnumeric https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460870 Summary: Need a CVS EPEL branch for gnumeric Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Package Change Request == Package Name: gnumeric New Branches: EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460870] Need a CVS EPEL branch for gnumeric
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460870 Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460870] Need a CVS EPEL branch for gnumeric
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460870 Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Component|Package Review |gnumeric Customer Facing||--- AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460870] Need a CVS EPEL branch for gnumeric
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460870 Mamoru Tasaka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | |t.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460867] Package review: perl-ORLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460867 --- Comment #1 from Rakesh Pandit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 05:22:44 EDT --- It helps to explicitly specify SPEC file URL - uploaded at some place. Secondly, IMHO description can be improved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457517] Review Request: perl-Padre - Perl Application Development and Refactoring Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457517 --- Comment #4 from Rakesh Pandit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 05:23:29 EDT --- Same here. Spec file, description of package ? Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458969] Review Request: InetVis - 3-D scatter-plot visualization for network traffic
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458969 --- Comment #2 from Lukas Kuklinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 05:48:00 EDT --- Updated srpm and spec, that should build fine: http://ilja.wz.cz/pkgs/inetvis.spec http://ilja.wz.cz/pkgs/inetvis-0.9.3.1-1.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460632] Review Request: ratbox-services - Service package for ircd-ratbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460632 Marek Mahut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #7 from Marek Mahut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 06:20:04 EDT --- Thank you!! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457517] Review Request: perl-Padre - Perl Application Development and Refactoring Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457517 --- Comment #5 from Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 06:30:33 EDT --- The spec http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/Padre/perl-Padre.spec Official description is quite short. Let's made up new one. Description: Padre is a text editor aimed to be an IDE for Perl. The application maintains its configuration information in a directory called .padre. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457517] Review Request: perl-Padre - Perl Application Development and Refactoring Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457517 Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||460867 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460867] Package review: perl-ORLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460867 Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||457517 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460867] Package review: perl-ORLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460867 --- Comment #2 from Marcela Maslanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 06:39:03 EDT --- http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-ORLite/perl-ORLite.spec I like this one paragraph, that should be enough. Description: ORLite is an object-relation system specifically for SQLite that follows many of the same principles as the ::Tiny series of modules and has a design that aligns directly to the capabilities of SQLite. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460887] New: Review Request: libpcapnav - a libpcap trace file navigation library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libpcapnav - a libpcap trace file navigation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460887 Summary: Review Request: libpcapnav - a libpcap trace file navigation library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.icir.org/christian/fedora/libpcapnav.spec SRPM URL: http://www.icir.org/christian/fedora/libpcapnav-0.8-1.src.rpm Description: libpcapnav is a libpcap wrapper library that allows navigation to arbitrary locations in a tcpdump trace file between reads. The API is intentionally much like that of the pcap library. You can navigate in trace files both in time and space: you can jump to a packet which is at approximately 2/3 of the trace, or you can jump as closely as possible to a packet with a given timestamp, and then read packets from there. Please note: I need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460885] New: Review Request: netdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: netdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460885 Summary: Review Request: netdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.icir.org/christian/fedora/netdude.spec SRPM URL: http://www.icir.org/christian/fedora/netdude-0.5.0-1.src.rpm Description: Netdude is the graphical front end of the network dump data editing framework. Netdude allows users to inspect and edit trace files to a degree that normally is only achievable by writing code. Some of its features include scalability to trace files of arbitrary size, ability to edit multiple traces at the same time, fine-grained packet header and content editing, filtering, moving, inserting and deleting packets, tcpdump output, and a plugin mechanism. Please note: I need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460886] New: Review Request: libnetdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libnetdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460886 Summary: Review Request: libnetdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.icir.org/christian/fedora/libnetdude.spec SRPM URL: http://www.icir.org/christian/fedora/libnetdude-0.11-1.src.rpm Description: libnetdude is the packet manipulating backend of Netdude, the network dump data editing framework. It fills the gap between the low-level libpcap API and the high-level requirements for packet manipulation applications. libnetdude provides data types and an API for the most common requirements when dealing with libpcap trace files: trace files, packets, network protocols, packet iterators, packet filters. libnetdude supports manipulation of arbitrarily large trace files, and is extendable through a plugin facility. Please note: I need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460885] Review Request: netdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460885 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460885] Review Request: netdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460885 Pavel Alexeev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks|177841 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460886] Review Request: libnetdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460886 manuel wolfshant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460887] Review Request: libpcapnav - a libpcap trace file navigation library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460887 manuel wolfshant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460885] Review Request: netdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460885 manuel wolfshant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 Depends on||460886 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460886] Review Request: libnetdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460886 manuel wolfshant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||460885 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460779] Review Request: nekovm - Neko embedded scripting language and virtual machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460779 --- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 08:38:36 EDT --- Yes, it was rather broken on 64 bit. This seems to resolve the issues, and I've also built it in Koji so the dependency / 64-bit problems should be fixed. Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/nekovm.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/nekovm-1.7.1-6.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Sep 2 2008 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 1.7.1-6 - BR sqlite-devel - Remove DOS line-endings and executable bits from the source. - Add RPM CFLAGS. - *.ndll files are always installed in /usr/lib/neko (even on 64 bit). - Search /usr/lib64 directory for libraries when building. - When building, link against libmysqlclient.so (not .a). - Avoid a compiler stack overflow when building on 64 bit. - Stop prelink from stripping the binaries. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=799546 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460780] Review Request: haxe - Web programming language targeting Flash, Javascript, PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460780 --- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 08:51:54 EDT --- Ooops, ignore comment 3. Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/haxe.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/haxe-2.0-4.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Sep 2 2008 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 2.0-4 - Prevent prelink from stripping the binaries. - Missing BR zlib-devel. I've also checked this builds on x86-64. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460780] Review Request: haxe - Web programming language targeting Flash, Javascript, PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460780 --- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 08:51:28 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/haxe.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/haxe-2.0-2.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Sep 2 2008 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 2.0-4 - Prevent prelink from stripping the binaries. - Missing BR zlib-devel. I've also checked this builds on x86-64. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460780] Review Request: haxe - Web programming language targeting Flash, Javascript, PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460780 --- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 08:52:21 EDT --- Erm, ignore comment 2, comment 3 is OK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458785] Review Request: libev - High-performance event loop/event model with lots of features
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458785 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 09:07:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > Point 3: fixed by removing event.h because it's, according to upstream, only > for bw compatibility with libevent -> N/A for me, IMHO. > > """ > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:16:40PM -0400, Michal Nowak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Do you thing it could be possible to avoid such conflict on upstream > > basis? > > Unlikely, the "conflict" is by design. I disagree. AFAIK using a special sub-directory path > > Giving example, to install event.h, ev.h and ev++.h to /usr/include/libev > > by default? > > That would break applications that expect to find it as event.h (basically > all libevent applications). Thoses can be fixed by choosing which pkgconfig files they will use. > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:06:27PM -0400, Michal Nowak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > - "Matt Tolton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why not just leave out event.h? That's just for libevent > > > compatibility. > > > > Thanks, that was my original decision. > > Why not do it like other distributions such as debian, where the common > header files are installed as alternatives, or optionally? > > event.h is an alternative to the libevent event.h, it's not an unrelated > header file, it serves the same purpose in both libraries. > """ event.h from libev and libevent.h are clearly not the same. if anyone wants to link against libev instead of libevent, the compatibility layer will not be provided by the Fedora package once event.h is removed. > (Not yet in mail archive http://lists.schmorp.de/pipermail/libev/) > > Point 4: > > No interest from upstream, probably because when it's in /usr/lib/ no special > magic is necessary. When it's not upstream -> projects won't use it -> useless > to have it in Fedora. > > What you think? I think pkgconfig support would solve the co-installation problem along with giving a accurate value for linking dependant application. (that can pick which libev.pc/libevent.pc to link with, as a configure option.) Now if upstream think it is not necessary,then I don't mind. This won't prevent this package to be good for Fedora. Might be important to check rpmlint output on installed files for the applications using libev... (to check for undefined-non-weak-symbol). But as soon as pkgconfig support would be merged upstream, the dependent apps can be fixed and patches against dependent applications will have a chance to be merged. Once done, there is a chance to avoid problems with libev/libevent -devel been installed on the same system. So to conclude: I don't want to prevent this package to be approved. So I just wait to have your answer back. ps: about your lib.pc , your have picked a bad example. You can see pkgconfig as an abstraction layer over hardcoded configuration path. quicklook on this: http://kwizart.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/libev-3.43-4.fc8.kwizart.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 431186] Review Request: itools - Command line tools for The Islamic Tools and Libraries Project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431186 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 09:13:37 EDT --- ping Is there something you don't understand ? (or you don't agree with ?) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460867] Review Request: perl-ORLite - Extremely light weight SQLite-specific ORM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460867 Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Package review: perl-ORLite |Review Request: perl-ORLite ||- Extremely light weight ||SQLite-specific ORM -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459148] Review Request: txt2rss - Convert from txt to rss
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459148 Rahul Sundaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460893] New: Review Request: ocaml-lwt - OCaml lightweight thread library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-lwt - OCaml lightweight thread library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460893 Summary: Review Request: ocaml-lwt - OCaml lightweight thread library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocsigen/ocaml-lwt.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocsigen/ocaml-lwt-1.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: OCaml lightweight thread library rpmlint says: ocaml-lwt.i386: E: no-binary which is OK for ocaml packages (for now). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460893] Review Request: ocaml-lwt - OCaml lightweight thread library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460893 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||460894 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460894] Review Request: ocsigen - Web programming framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460894 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||460893 Customer Facing||--- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460894] New: Review Request: ocsigen - Web programming framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ocsigen - Web programming framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460894 Summary: Review Request: ocsigen - Web programming framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocsigen/ocsigen.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocsigen/ocsigen-1.1.0-5.fc10.src.rpm Description: Web programming framework rpmlint says: ocsigen.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/ocsigen apache ocsigen.i386: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/ocsigen apache Not entirely sure what this means. We reuse the same 'apache' user as Apache itself (created, if it doesn't exist, %pre, just like Apache). ocsigen.i386: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/ocsigen ocsigen.i386: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/ocsigen/extensions/ocsidbm These are OK, per the packaging policy: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/OCaml#Stripping_binaries ocsigen.i386: W: percent-in-%pre Strange one. My %pre is exactly the same as the Fedora Apache package. ocsigen.i386: W: ocaml-naming-policy-not-applied /usr/lib/ocaml/ocsigen/ocsigen_headers.cmi That's OK - programs don't need to be called ocaml-* ocsigen.src:85: W: configure-without-libdir-spec Yes, because this isn't autoconf. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459148] Review Request: txt2rss - Convert from txt to rss
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459148 --- Comment #5 from Rahul Sundaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 09:31:33 EDT --- I haven't done a scratch build but otherwise looks sane. The only problem I see is the lack of the license text within the package. You MUST include a copy of the license. This is recommended by the guidelines and mandated by the GPL license Also as a recommendation, we need a man page. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452354] Review Request: entertrack - Web-based artifact tracking/management system written in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452354
--- Comment #5 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 09:57:45
EDT ---
+ rpmlint output
Lots and lots of:
entertrack.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/entertrack/cache apache
entertrack.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/entertrack/cache apache
entertrack.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/entertrack/sessions apache
entertrack.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/entertrack/sessions apache
As far as I'm aware these warnings are harmless.
+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
Because this isn't a PHP add-on, it doesn't need to obey the PHP naming
guidelines.
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
? license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
I'm dubious about this package. It includes a wholesale copy
of JpGraph (http://www.aditus.nu/jpgraph/jpdownload.php).
The files say simply "All Rights Reserved" but the website says
"JpGraph is released under a dual license. QPL 1.0 (Qt Free
Licensee) For non-commercial, open-source or educational
use and JpGraph Professional License for commercial use."
This is "open source" (very loosely defined), but not
"non-commercial". Is this the free or the professional
version?
At the very minimum I think we need to run this one past
Tom 'spot' Callaway, and I'd be happier if you could check
that the copy included is not the professional version.
The email/ directory is another copied package, license
GPL (version unspecified).
The includes/ directory is LGPLv2+.
- license matches the actual package license
+ %doc includes license file
%doc includes one of the license files anyway.
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
87e141f72ce3994cf499e31d3e6a0274 916402
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
i386
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
? %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
Probably could have installed the po files using %find_lang
instead of deleting them. Was there a problem with them?
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun
+ does not use Prefix: /usr
+ package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ %defattr line
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ consistent use of macros
? package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8
Optional:
? if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if
available
- reviewer should build the package in mock
- the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
- review should test the package functions as described
n/a scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or
/usr/sbin
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456280] Review Request: ini4j - Java API for handling files in Windows .ini format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456280 --- Comment #9 from Lillian Angel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 10:01:28 EDT --- APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450164] Review Request: ace-tao - The ADAPTIVE Communication Environment (ACE) and The ACE ORB (TAO)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450164 --- Comment #15 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 10:12:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > Issue has been resolved upstream, will be part of the upcoming x.6.6 release > of > ACE/TAO/CIAO Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458969] Review Request: InetVis - 3-D scatter-plot visualization for network traffic
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458969 Tomas Heinrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Tomas Heinrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 10:15:10 EDT --- Seems to be OK now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450371] Review Request: pokegen - Strategy/RPG game engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450371 --- Comment #28 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 10:41:11 EDT --- Wow. We're really walking the line on fair use. The Summary is OK, it falls safely into the realm of fair use (you should make it say Pokémon (TM) ). I really think that upstream should strongly consider using a name that isn't a direct derivation of Nintendo's trademark, given that Nintendo is notoriously litigous about their marks, and has explicitly stated that individuals do not have permissions to use their Pokémon (TM) related marks (not to mention going to the WIPO to reclaim related domain names and filing C&D over trademark issues). The question is whether Pokégen is "identical or confusingly similar" to Pokémon (TM). I really hate to say this, but I think it fails that test, thus, it is likely infringing upon Nintendo's trademark. If it were "pkgen", I would say it is unique enough, but as is, especially given the word structure and the use of the apostrophe... let me put it this way: if I showed a young child the word "Pokégen", they would likely confuse it for "Pokémon". I don't see any other trademark concerns in the code (you're not using the creature names), but you're going to need to rename this before it is okay. As I said before, "pkgen" would be one possible alternative that would be acceptable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455221] Review Request: python-numdisplay - Visualize numpy array objects in ds9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455221 Sergio Pascual <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458969] Review Request: InetVis - 3-D scatter-plot visualization for network traffic
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458969 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Kopeček <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 10:50:34 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: inetvis Short Description: 3-D scatter-plot visualization for network traffic Owners: mildew Branches: InitialCC: pvrabec Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452453] Review Request: perl-Crypt-RIPEMD160 - Perl extension for the RIPEMD-160 Hash function
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452453 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 10:55:05 EDT --- I made yet another attempt to contact upstream, and I actually got a response: * Dear Mr. Callaway, I see no problem in granting Fedora the permission to use modify, and redistribute this code. Please let me know if you need any further formal statement about this from our university, since this would need to pass by our legal council. Prof. Bart Preneel --- Katholieke Universiteit Leuven tel. +32 16 32 11 48 Dept. Electrical Engineering-ESAT / COSICfax. +32 16 32 19 69 Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 Bus 2446, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUM * I emailed him back to let him know that we would need a more formal statement, but this looks like something we can get resolved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455507] Review Request: jsmin - JavaScript minifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455507 --- Comment #3 from Dave Malcolm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 10:59:00 EDT --- I can approach upstream, but what is the exact problem here; are you interpreting the clause as a "limitation against a field of endeavor"? Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460588] Review Request: perl-Crypt-RIPEMD160 - Crypt-RIPEMD160 module for perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460588 Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 11:01:31 EDT --- So bug 452453 is simply stalled due to legal issues which would also apply here, and the review itself is trivial once the legal issues are cleared, so I'll just go ahead and close this as a dup and if you'd like to comaintain you're welcome to do so. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 452453 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452453] Review Request: perl-Crypt-RIPEMD160 - Perl extension for the RIPEMD-160 Hash function
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452453 Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 11:01:31 EDT --- *** Bug 460588 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452354] Review Request: entertrack - Web-based artifact tracking/management system written in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452354 --- Comment #6 from Dan Horák <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 11:08:33 EDT --- Hm, it looks like that JpGraph is a bit problematic - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue82#JPGraph_License_Query_Shows_How_To_Remove_A_Package. I will remove it from the released source package completely, the cost will be non-working graph creation, but that is already mentioned in conf/paths.conf. I will talk about that issue with EnterTrack's upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459148] Review Request: txt2rss - Convert from txt to rss
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459148 --- Comment #6 from Rakesh Pandit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 11:54:16 EDT --- Thanks, I have reported upstream that they should include license file in there source. http://code.google.com/p/txt2rss/issues/detail?id=4 Upstream has confirmed that it will be included ASAP. I do not consider these issues as blockers but rather in a SHOULD list. between I have added a man page and submitted it upstream as well. SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/txt2rss.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/txt2rss-0.1-3.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457924] Review Request: libmicrohttpd - Lightweight library for embedding a webserver in applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457924 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #8 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:02:03 EDT --- For what its worth, on a cursory glance, this is less of a "license incompatibility", and more of a "the resulting work would be GPLv3+". As is, we can safely ship this in Fedora, tagged as "GPLv3+". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460912] New: Review Request: DeviceKit-power - Power Management Service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: DeviceKit-power - Power Management Service https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460912 Summary: Review Request: DeviceKit-power - Power Management Service Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/fedora/DeviceKit-power.spec SRPM URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/fedora/DeviceKit-power-001-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: DeviceKit-power provides a daemon, API and command line tools for managing power devices attached to the system. Along with the other DeviceKit-* daemons, it will replace most of the functionality of HAL in F11. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459631] Review Request: insight - GDB debugger GUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459631 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Customer Facing||--- --- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:05:39 EDT --- RH Legal is looking into this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460912] Review Request: DeviceKit-power - Power Management Service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460912 Richard Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Customer Facing||--- --- Comment #1 from Richard Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:05:47 EDT --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] RPMS]$ rpmlint DeviceKit-power-001-1.fc9.i386.rpm DeviceKit-power.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/udev/rules.d/95-devkit-power-csr.rules DeviceKit-power.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.freedesktop.DeviceKit.Power.conf DeviceKit-power.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/udev/rules.d/95-devkit-power-wup.rules DeviceKit-power.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/udev/rules.d/95-devkit-power-hid.rules 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] RPMS]$ rpmlint DeviceKit-power-devel-001-1.fc9.i386.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] RPMS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/DeviceKit-power-001-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. When upstream depends on a new udev, I'll install the rules files out of /etc -- but for now I want to build on F9 with a minimum of hassle. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 448613] Review Request: perl-EV - Wrapper for the libev high-performance event loop library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448613 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks|182235 | --- Comment #7 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:12:51 EDT --- The license tag is correct. You really should try to use the system libev rather than a bundled copy. Also, your SRPM in comment #5 doesn't seem to exist. However, there is no need for FE-Legal here, so I'm lifting it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460779] Review Request: nekovm - Neko embedded scripting language and virtual machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460779
--- Comment #4 from Dan Horák <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:14:09 EDT ---
formal review is here, see notes at the end
OK source files match upstream:
cf2d1ebcb483fe88abb263fe276015f710a751bb neko-1.7.1.tar.gz
OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
OK build root is correct.
OK license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK BuildRequires are proper.
OK compiler flags are appropriate.
OK %clean is present.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
?? rpmlint is silent.
OK final provides and requires look sane.
N/A %check is present and all tests pass.
BAD no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
BAD no scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK headers in -devel.
OK no pkgconfig files.
OK no libtool .la droppings.
OK not a GUI app.
- use --keepdate when running dos2unix to preserve the timestamps for the files
- shared library is added, but ldconfig scriptlets are missing
- rpmlint complains
nekovm.src:102: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/neko
nekovm.src:109: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib
nekovm.src:110: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/*.so
nekovm.src:127: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/neko/
- I think these will create a multilib issue together with shared libneko.so
in the main package
- what is the purpose of the *.ndll? runtime libs for nekovm based apps?
nekovm.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libneko.so
- result of not-so-right linking command
I think you need to split the package to
main - %{_bindir} + /usr/lib/neko
libs - %{_libdir}
devel - %{_includedir}
- I think that more appropriate Group for the main package is
Development/Languages, the -libs should go into System Environment/Libraries
and -devel should be in Development/Libraries
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460912] Review Request: DeviceKit-power - Power Management Service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460912 Richard Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Richard Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:08:27 EDT --- Branches required are F-10 (if we create after the branch) and devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455507] Review Request: jsmin - JavaScript minifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455507 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:22:36 EDT --- Basically, the concern is that "shall be used for good, not evil" constitutes a use restriction. Not only that, it is a vague use restriction, where the definitions of "good" and "evil" are not defined in the terms of the license. Upstream needs to take one of the following actions for this to be okay for Fedora (in order of preference): 1. Drop that line entirely. 2. No, really. Drop that line entirely. Licenses are not the appropriate place for such "joke text". 3. Change the line to read something like "The software should be used for Good, not Evil." This makes it a suggestion, not a use-restriction. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454215] Review Request: stk - Synthesis ToolKit in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454215 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #10 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:29:46 EDT --- What is the legal concern here? Do you just want me to do a general audit on the package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456276] Review Request: freemarker - FreeMarker template engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456276 Lillian Angel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459934] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Pg - Parse and format PostgreSQL dates and times
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459934 --- Comment #3 from Chris Weyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:49:36 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-DateTime-Format-Pg Short Description: Parse and format PostgreSQL dates and times Owners: cweyl Branches: F-8, F-9, devel InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455507] Review Request: jsmin - JavaScript minifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455507 --- Comment #5 from Dave Malcolm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:46:30 EDT --- Thanks; I've emailed the author asking for the text to be removed/changed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456276] Review Request: freemarker - FreeMarker template engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456276
--- Comment #7 from Lillian Angel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 12:55:29 EDT
---
APPROVED
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
* 1 Packaging Guidelines
ok
+ 1.2.1 Licensing
ok
+ 1.3.1 Exceptions
ok
o 1.7 Use rpmlint
$ rpmlint /notnfs/langel/rpm/RPMS/noarch/freemarker-*
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
o 1.8 Changelogs
ok
o 1.9 Tags
ok
o 1.10 BuildRoot tag
ok
o 1.11 Requires
ok
o 1.12 BuildRequires
ok
o 1.13 Summary and description
ok
o 1.14 Encoding
ok
o 1.15 Documentation
ok
o 1.16 Compiler flags
n/a
o 1.17 Debuginfo packages
n/a
o 1.18 Exclusion of Static Libraries
n/a
o 1.19 Duplication of system libraries
n/a
o 1.20 Beware of Rpath
n/a
o 1.21 Configuration files
n/a
o 1.22 Initscripts
n/a
o 1.23 Desktop files
n/a
o 1.24 Macros
ok
o 1.25 Handling Locale Files
n/a
o 1.26 Timestamps
n/a
o 1.27 Parallel make
n/a
o 1.28 Scriptlets requirements
n/a
o 1.29 Running scriptlets only in certain situations
n/a
o 1.30 Scriplets are only allowed to write in certain directories
n/a
o 1.31 Conditional dependencies
n/a
o 1.32 Build packages with separate user accounts
n/a
o 1.33 Relocatable packages
n/a
o 1.34 Code Vs Content
ok
o 1.35 File and Directory Ownership
ok
o 1.36 Users and Groups
ok
o 1.37 Web Applications
n/a
o 1.38 Conflicts
n/a
o 1.39 No External Kernel Modules
n/a
o 1.40 No Files or Directories under /srv
n/a
o 1.41 Application Specific Guidelines
n/a
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
MUST Items:
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
done. no errors
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
ok
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines
.
ok
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
ok
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
ok
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
ok
- 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
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
ok
- 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
(http://www.ioccc.org/).
ok
- 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. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
ok
- 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.
ok
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
ok
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
ok
- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, 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.
ok
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
ok
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
ok
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
ok
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
ok
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines .
ok
- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity)
- MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program mu
[Bug 457247] Review Request: sugar-terminal -- Terminal activity for sugar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457247 --- Comment #3 from Jeremy Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 13:05:54 EDT --- Okay, with the fixes in sugar-toolkit-0.82.5-2, things work nicely now New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sugar-terminal Short Description: Terminal activity for sugar Owners: katzj Branches: devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457247] Review Request: sugar-terminal -- Terminal activity for sugar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457247 --- Comment #4 from Robin Norwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 13:31:55 EDT --- btw, I don't mind to be listed as co-maintainer (rnorwood) for any of these activity packages if you like. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456280] Review Request: ini4j - Java API for handling files in Windows .ini format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456280 --- Comment #10 from Victor G. Vasilyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 13:32:03 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ini4j Short Description: Java API for handling files in Windows .ini format Owners: victorv Branches: InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460924] New: Review Request: sugar-calculator - Calculator for Sugar Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sugar-calculator - Calculator for Sugar Environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460924 Summary: Review Request: sugar-calculator - Calculator for Sugar Environment Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://katzj.fedorapeople.org/review/sugar-calculate/sugar-calculate.spec SRPM URL: http://katzj.fedorapeople.org/review/sugar-terminal/sugar-calculate-23-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Calculator for Sugar Environment -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460925] New: Review Request: libibcm - Userspace InfiniBand Connection Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libibcm - Userspace InfiniBand Connection Manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460925 Summary: Review Request: libibcm - Userspace InfiniBand Connection Manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/libibcm.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/libibcm-1.0.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: libibcm provides a userspace library that handles the majority of the low level work required to open an RDMA connection between two machines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460928] New: Review Request: sugar-chat
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sugar-chat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460928 Summary: Review Request: sugar-chat Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://katzj.fedorapeople.org/review/sugar-chat/sugar-chat.spec SRPM URL: http://katzj.fedorapeople.org/review/sugar-chat/sugar-chat-46-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Chat client for Sugar Environment -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460930] New: Review Request: libibumad - OpenFabrics Alliance InfiniBand umad (user MAD) library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libibumad - OpenFabrics Alliance InfiniBand umad (user MAD) library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460930 Summary: Review Request: libibumad - OpenFabrics Alliance InfiniBand umad (user MAD) library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/libibumad.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/libibumad-1.2.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: libibumad provides the user MAD library functions which sit on top of the user MAD modules in the kernel. These are used by the IB diagnostic and management tools, including OpenSM. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460931] New: Review Request: librdmacm - Userspace RDMA Connection Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: librdmacm - Userspace RDMA Connection Manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460931 Summary: Review Request: librdmacm - Userspace RDMA Connection Manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/librdmacm.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/librdmacm-1.0.7-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: librdmacm provides a userspace RDMA Communication Managment API. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460932] New: Review Request: opensm - OpenIB InfiniBand Subnet Manager and management utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: opensm - OpenIB InfiniBand Subnet Manager and management utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460932 Summary: Review Request: opensm - OpenIB InfiniBand Subnet Manager and management utilities Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/opensm.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/opensm-3.2.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: OpenSM is the OpenIB project's Subnet Manager for Infiniband networks. The subnet manager is run as a system daemon on one of the machines in the infiniband fabric to manage the fabric's routing state. This package also contains various tools for diagnosing and testing Infiniband networks that can be used from any machine and do not need to be run on a machine running the opensm daemon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460933] New: Review Request: rdma - Infiniband/iWARP Kernel Module Initializer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rdma - Infiniband/iWARP Kernel Module Initializer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460933 Summary: Review Request: rdma - Infiniband/iWARP Kernel Module Initializer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/rdma.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/ib/SRPMS/rdma-1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm Description: User space initialization scripts for the kernel InfiniBand/iWARP drivers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460933] Review Request: rdma - Infiniband/iWARP Kernel Module Initializer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460933 Steve Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Customer Facing||--- Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460931] Review Request: librdmacm - Userspace RDMA Connection Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460931 Steve Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Customer Facing||--- Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460925] Review Request: libibcm - Userspace InfiniBand Connection Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460925 Steve Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Customer Facing||--- Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460932] Review Request: opensm - OpenIB InfiniBand Subnet Manager and management utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460932 Steve Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Customer Facing||--- Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460923] Review Request: libcxgb3 - This driver enables Chelsio iWARP capable ethernet devices.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460923 Steve Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Customer Facing||--- Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456276] Review Request: freemarker - FreeMarker template engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456276 --- Comment #8 from Victor G. Vasilyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 14:02:01 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: freemarker Short Description: FreeMarker template engine Owners: victorv Branches: InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452486] Review Request: stage - 2D multiple-robot simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452486
--- Comment #5 from Tim Niemueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 14:05:35 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Well, this may call for merging of -devel branch with the main package.
> thoughts?
>
[...]
I'm about to commit a patch (currently testing), which will use
%{_libdir}/player as a plugin directory. There is one plugin coming with Player
where I move the library file to the desired name in the new Player plugin
directory and removed the symlinks. So this would probably what we want to do
for now, you agree?
> the last time i tried to build it failed miserably. they have lot of pending
> things to put in stage3, so as things become little stable with the upstream,
> i
> will update the srpm.
I think that's a good decision. Let it stabilize a bit...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444792] Review Request: augeas - library for changing configuration files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444792 --- Comment #19 from David Lutterkort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 14:25:38 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: augeas New Branches: EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454215] Review Request: stk - Synthesis ToolKit in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454215 --- Comment #11 from Thomas Moschny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 14:27:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > What is the legal concern here? Do you just want me to do a general audit on > the package? In short: yes. Long answer: Even after talking to upstream, the legal status of some files remains unclear to me, especially that of the .mdi and .ski files. Quoting Gary Scavone, one of the authors: "... I think there should be no issue with the .ski files because most were originally created by Perry Cook himself. It is possible a few were created by Craig Sapp's MIDI to SKINI converter from MIDI files (though only Bach pieces). As for the MIDI files, I downloaded a few over time, like the bach fugue. I think the copyright notice you see there (David Huron) is for the software that was used to do the MIDI to SKINI conversion. Bach's music is clearly no longer copyright protected. So, if there's any issue, it _might_ be the tango, but I don't know if that has an author. Worst case ... just delete the tango file, since the other stuff is Bach and the rights are clear. ..." While the music (composition) itself might not be copyright protected anymore, a certain performance might be, I think. There are three midi files: - bwv772.mid has a notice that says the harpsichord was played by John Sankey. Here's his copyright notice: http://www.sankey.ws/copyright.html. - tango.mid has "Copyright 1996 R Finley", might be that one: http://www.classicalarchives.com/info/tango.txt. - jesu.mid has "Copyright (C) 1992 MTA All rights reserved." I don't know who/what MTA is. Not sure what to do about these three files, and I think some of the .ski files might be problematic as well. Easiest solution would be to simply remove all of them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459933] Review Request: perl-RPC-XML - Set of classes for core data, message and XML handling
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459933 --- Comment #8 from Chris Weyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 14:49:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > I had similar problem with hosts test in perl packages. I thought that's > problem of lazy network. Switch off this one test isn't problem for review, > but > it should be fixed in upstream. Yah, and reported as such (see http://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=38917 ). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460838] Review Request: printoxx - Print image files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460838 --- Comment #1 from Nicoleau Fabien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 16:00:57 EDT --- Update to add desktop file : Spec URL: http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/SPECS/printoxx.spec SRPM URL: http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/srpms.fc9/printoxx-1.1-2.fc9.src.rpm rpmlint output : [EMAIL PROTECTED] rpmbuild]$ rpmlint /home/builder/rpmbuild/SRPMS/printoxx-1.1-2.fc9.src.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/printoxx-1.1-2.fc9.i386.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/printoxx-debuginfo-1.1-2.fc9.i386.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rebuild under mock is OK -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454215] Review Request: stk - Synthesis ToolKit in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454215 --- Comment #12 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 16:04:21 EDT --- Agreed. Remove them all. If and only if you can: * clearly determine the copyright holder * explicitly confirm from the copyright holder that we have permission to use the content under an acceptable license. Then, you can include those files on a case-by-case basis. It might not be a bad idea to look for some Creative Commons licensed mid or ski files as possible replacements, or to ask on some of the Fedora lists if any musicians want to make some for you. Only thing you need to avoid are any of the files which are marked "NC" or "No Commercial". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458974] Review Request: OpenCASCADE - The OpenCASCADE framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458974 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Customer Facing||--- --- Comment #3 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 16:50:43 EDT --- OpenCascade license is non-free. Given that Debian has been trying to resolve the license issues with upstream and not having any luck, I'm not hopeful. However, if you'd like me to explain the specific problems, I can do so. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438750] Review Request: qtoctave - fronted for octave written using qt4 widgets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438750 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 17:15:47 EDT --- qtoctave-0.8.1-0.20080823.svn165.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qtoctave-0.8.1-0.20080823.svn165.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445604] Review Request: tennix - A funny 2D tennis game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445604 --- Comment #11 from Claudio Tomasoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 17:17:52 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: tennix Short Description: A simple tennis game Owners: claudiotomasoni Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450371] Review Request: pokegen - Strategy/RPG game engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450371 --- Comment #29 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-02 17:18:51 EDT --- Alright. If there's no objections to "sigen" (for "sigma game engine") within the week, I'll rename the sourceforge page. I'll work on getting the source to not use the old name in the meantime. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438750] Review Request: qtoctave - fronted for octave written using qt4 widgets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438750 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 17:15:53 EDT --- qtoctave-0.8.1-0.20080823.svn165.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qtoctave-0.8.1-0.20080823.svn165.fc8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460959] New: Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460959 Summary: Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Description: Libkml is an implementation of the OGC KML 2.2 standard. is written in C++ and bindings are available via SWIG to other languages. It can be used in applications that want to parse, generate and operate on KML. SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/libkml.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc10.src.rpm [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint libkml-0.4.0-1.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]$ rpmlint libkml-0.4.0-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]$ rpmlint libkml-debuginfo-0.4.0-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]$ rpmlint libkml-devel-0.4.0-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm libkml-devel.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. I am not sure why this last warning despite usr-lib has libkml folder containing *.so files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460960] New: Review Request: sugar-write -- Word processor for Sugar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sugar-write -- Word processor for Sugar https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460960 Summary: Review Request: sugar-write -- Word processor for Sugar Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://katzj.fedorapeople.org/review/sugar-write/sugar-write.spec SRPM URL: http://katzj.fedorapeople.org/review/sugar-write/sugar-write-57-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Word processor based on abiword for Sugar -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450371] Review Request: pokegen - Strategy/RPG game engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450371 --- Comment #30 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 18:02:30 EDT --- "sigen" is perfectly fine. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 448122] Review Request: trash-cli - Command line trashcan (recycle bin) interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448122 --- Comment #19 from Andrea Francia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 18:48:01 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #15) > > (In reply to comment #14) > > > The right level > > > of non-genericity is something subjective, my feeling is that > > > trash is not right since it may clash easily with an application doing > > > something > > > very different, and be used in a standard in the future, be > > > is a defacto standard like what is in some basic package like util-linux, > > > coreutils, bash buil-in and a few others or a real standard. > > > > When a such standard will be created I can accommodate the trash-cli command > > names to do not conflict with the standard. > > Anticipating by not using generic names will help not forcing users > to redo all their scripts. So I should reduce the usability of a program for something that could (or could not) happen in the future? I never heard about a list of UNIX commands names reserved for future uses. Can we relax this constraing putting trash-cli in the extra packages? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 Philip Prindeville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #314112|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #31 from Philip Prindeville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 19:25:17 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=315602) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=315602) Replacement .spec file -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 Philip Prindeville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #314111|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #32 from Philip Prindeville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-02 19:27:11 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=315603) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=315603) Replacement .src.rpm file -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
