[Bug 488106] Review Request: django-notification - User notification management for the Django web 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=488106 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-03 02:53:52 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1216036 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. 3e485b0e047b70bfb00c783deae9e44b django-notification-0.1.2.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc files present. + BuildRequires are proper. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + egg file generated from source. Suggestions: 1) I will suggest to use %doc CONTRIBUTORS.txt LICENSE.txt docs/* will make not to create docs named directory 2) Change %define to %global 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 488197] Review Request: ibus-rawcode - The Rawcode engine for IBus
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=488197 --- Comment #3 from Pravin Satpute 2009-03-03 02:52:51 EDT --- remove %define as it was not require for ibus-rawcode added BuildRequires: ibus-devel new url Spec URL: http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/ibus-rawcode/ibus-rawcode.spec SRPM URL: http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/ibus-rawcode/ibus-rawcode-1.0.0.20090303-2.fc11.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 488107] Review Request: django-pagination - Django pagination tools
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=488107 --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-03 02:44:02 EDT --- also, I will suggest to use %doc CONTRIBUTORS.txt LICENSE.txt docs/* will make not to create docs named directory -- 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 488107] Review Request: django-pagination - Django pagination tools
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=488107 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 488107] Review Request: django-pagination - Django pagination tools
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=488107 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||panem...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-03 02:38:46 EDT --- Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1216042 rpmlint output django-pagination.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/pagination/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/django.mo django-pagination.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/pagination/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/django.mo django-pagination.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/pagination/locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/django.mo you should use lang macro to handle locales. -- 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 485621] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed - Interface to the Mozilla embedding widget
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=485621 --- Comment #2 from Remi Collet 2009-03-03 02:35:10 EDT --- 1, 2 and 3 fixed About 4, I don't think this folders need to be owned be the package. Both are already owned by perl-Gtk2 which is Required . Both are also owned by perl-Gtk2-TrayIcon which is probably a mistake (or an exception for the Guidelines exists for perl ?) Guidelines : Packages must not own files already owned by other packages. http://remi.fedorapeople.org/perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed.spec http://remi.fedorapeople.org/perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08-2.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 488197] Review Request: ibus-rawcode - The Rawcode engine for IBus
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=488197 --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-03 02:19:53 EDT --- oops looks like ibus-devel-1.1.0.20090225-1.fc11 in rawhide provides ibus-1.0 not ibus-1.1 -- 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 485961] Review Request: gmusicbrowser - Jukebox for large collections of music 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=485961 Chris Weyl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cw...@alumni.drew.edu Alias||gmusicbrowser -- 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 488197] Review Request: ibus-rawcode - The Rawcode engine for IBus
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=488197 --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-03 02:08:48 EDT --- you need to BR: ibus-devel as well as need to modify configure.ac to change package requirement from ibus-1.0 to ibus-1.1 Also, change %define to %global in spec. -- 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 488106] Review Request: django-notification - User notification management for the Django web 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=488106 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 481731] Review Request: resource-agents - Open Source HA Resource Agents for Red Hat Cluster
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=481731 Fabio Massimo Di Nitto changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto 2009-03-03 02:08:18 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: resource-agents New Branches: F-10 Owners: fabbione This was an oversight on my side (so yeah I take all the blame) from the original CVS request. The whole point of this package is to make updates simpler. So it needs to propagate into F-10 too. -- 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 481751] Review Request: fence-agents - Fence Agents for Red Hat Cluster
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=481751 Fabio Massimo Di Nitto changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto 2009-03-03 02:04:14 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: fence-agents New Branches: F-10 Owners: fabbione This was an oversight on my side (so yeah I take all the blame) from the original CVS request. The whole point of this package is to make updates simpler. So it needs to propagate into F-10 too. -- 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 488099] Review Request: python-polib - A library to parse and manage gettext catalogs
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=488099 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-03 01:56:26 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1216017 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM + rpmlint is NOT silent for RPM. python-polib.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/polib.py 0644 ==> can be ignored. + source files in tarball match upstream but as this is svn checkout unable to verify md5sum. + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc files present. + BuildRequires are proper. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Not a GUI app. Suggestions: 1) use %global instead %define 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 488198] New: Review Request: sugar-update-control - Activity update control panel 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-update-control - Activity update control panel for Sugar https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488198 Summary: Review Request: sugar-update-control - Activity update control panel for Sugar Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ber...@codewiz.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.codewiz.org/pub/fedora/specs/sugar-update-control.spec SRPM URL: http://www.codewiz.org/pub/fedora/source/sugar-update-control-0.20-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Control panel item for the Sugar graphical environment which locates and installs activity updates. -- 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 488197] Review Request: ibus-rawcode - The Rawcode engine for IBus
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=488197 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Summary|Review Request: ibus-hangul |Review Request: |- The Rawcode engine for|ibus-rawcode - The Rawcode |IBus|engine for IBus Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 488197] New: Review Request: ibus-hangul - The Rawcode engine for IBus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ibus-hangul - The Rawcode engine for IBus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488197 Summary: Review Request: ibus-hangul - The Rawcode engine for IBus Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: psatp...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/ibus-rawcode/ibus-rawcode.spec SRPM URL: http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/ibus-rawcode/ibus-rawcode-1.0.0.20090303-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The Rawcode Engine for IBus -- 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 488099] Review Request: python-polib - A library to parse and manage gettext catalogs
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=488099 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 488197] Review Request: ibus-hangul - The Rawcode engine for IBus
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=488197 Pravin Satpute changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.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 483615] Review Request: CodeAnalyst - Performance Analysis Suite for AMD-based System (based on Oprofile)
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=483615 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #15 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-03 00:59:03 EDT --- Nice to see you are doing reviews. I will take 2 days to review your package. Till then keep reviewing. I will Sponsor 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 485621] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed - Interface to the Mozilla embedding widget
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=485621
Chris Weyl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||cw...@alumni.drew.edu
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cw...@alumni.drew.edu
Alias||perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Chris Weyl 2009-03-03 00:32:10 EDT
---
rpmlint's warnings are expected for Perl packages; and while
MozEmbed.so()(64bit) will need to be filtered, we're still figuring out the
best way to do that over on fedora-perl-devel-list, so that's not a blocker
right now.
1) MozEmbed.xs and other source files say LGPLv2+.
2) %check should be included, even if "make test" needs to be wrapped in some
construct to prevent it from running in mock, e.g.:
%{?_with_display_tests: make test}
This will allow rebuilding locally using "rpmbuild --with display-tests" or
defining "%_with_display_tests 1" in ~/.rpmmacros.
3) '%{__rm}' should be replaced with just 'rm', or make and chmod also need to
be their macro representations. (Though I always prefer the %{_fixperms} chmod
incantation :))
4) %{perl_vendorarch}/Gtk2 and %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/Gtk2 need to be included
as dirs in %files. One easy way to do so is:
%{perl_vendorarch}/*
%exclude %dir %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/
koji @ http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1215907
Source tarball matches upstream:
23ffb8e4134ee8a8897149bf9db43d400cdbbe17 Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08.tar.gz
23ffb8e4134ee8a8897149bf9db43d400cdbbe17 Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08.tar.gz.srpm
Provides, requires and rpmlint looks sane:
=> perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm <=
> rpmlint
perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/Gtk2/MozEmbed/Install/gtkmozembed2perl.h
perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/Gtk2/MozEmbed/Install/gtkmozembed2perl-autogen.h
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
> provides for perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
MozEmbed.so()(64bit)
perl(Gtk2::MozEmbed) = 0.08
perl(Gtk2::MozEmbed::Install::Files)
perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed = 0.08-1.fc10
perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed(x86-64) = 0.08-1.fc10
> requires for perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
gecko-libs = 1.9.0.6
libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libcairo.so.2()(64bit)
libdl.so.2()(64bit)
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgthread-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libnspr4.so()(64bit)
libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
libplc4.so()(64bit)
libplds4.so()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
librt.so.1()(64bit)
libxpcom.so()(64bit)
libxul.so()(64bit)
perl >= 0:5.008
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
perl(DynaLoader)
perl(Glib) >= 1.180
perl(Gtk2)
perl(Gtk2) >= 1.081
perl(strict)
perl(warnings)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
=> perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-debuginfo-0.08-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm <=
> rpmlint
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
> provides for perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-debuginfo-0.08-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-debuginfo = 0.08-1.fc10
perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-debuginfo(x86-64) = 0.08-1.fc10
> requires for perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-debuginfo-0.08-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
Address #1-4 and I think we're in business :-)
--
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 471520] Review Request: rubygem-simple-rss - A simple, flexible, extensible, and liberal RSS and Atom reader for Ruby
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=471520 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-03 00:14:15 EDT --- rubygem-simple-rss-1.1-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-simple-rss-1.1-4.fc10 -- 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 488010] Review Request: ibus-table-cangjie - Cang Jie input method for ibus-table.
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Package Review: |Review Request: |ibus-table-cangjie |ibus-table-cangjie - Cang ||Jie input method for ||ibus-table. --- Comment #5 from Caius "kaio" Chance 2009-03-02 23:47:21 EDT --- Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cchance/packaging/ibus-table-cangjie-1.1.0.20090220-1.fc11.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cchance/packaging/ibus-table-cangjie.spec Description: A split from ibus-table-chinese, which was sub-package of ibus-table. -- 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 487421] Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written 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=487421 --- Comment #11 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-02 23:40:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > This package has already passed review, so if you want you can bring this up > in > a seperate defect. This all being said, correctness is good, so I'll quote > from the page as I read it: sure I will. > > """ > * In general, packagers are strongly encouraged not to ship static libs > unless a compelling reason exists. > """ > > The word was encouraged, not required. It also says > So I was interested to know that "compelling reason" which made static libraries to be shipped. > """ > There are two scenarios in which static libraries are packaged: > """ > > This package follows scenario 1 of 2: > > """ >1. Static libraries and shared libraries. In this case, the static > libraries > must be placed in a *-static subpackage. > """ > > This is what the RPM does. I would also say that when doing the final spec, > John could, if he wanted, choose to not build the static package and > everything > would be ok, it is not highly important to have the static package there. So you are asking to remove .a files from -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 488103] Review Request: django-evolution - Schema evolution for Django
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=488103 Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ivazquez...@gmail | |.com) | --- Comment #3 from Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams 2009-03-02 23:27:14 EDT --- Updated. http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-evolution/django-evolution.spec http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-evolution/django-evolution-0.0-0.1.svnr164.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 487421] Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written 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=487421 --- Comment #10 from Michael DeHaan 2009-03-02 22:53:44 EDT --- This package has already passed review, so if you want you can bring this up in a seperate defect. This all being said, correctness is good, so I'll quote from the page as I read it: """ * In general, packagers are strongly encouraged not to ship static libs unless a compelling reason exists. """ The word was encouraged, not required. It also says """ There are two scenarios in which static libraries are packaged: """ This package follows scenario 1 of 2: """ 1. Static libraries and shared libraries. In this case, the static libraries must be placed in a *-static subpackage. """ This is what the RPM does. I would also say that when doing the final spec, John could, if he wanted, choose to not build the static package and everything would be ok, it is not highly important to have the static package there. -- 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 475852] Review Request: gnustep-base - GNUstep Base library package
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=475852 --- Comment #7 from Scott Christley 2009-03-02 22:35:53 EDT --- This is because of bug 475112. ffcall needs to be compiled with -fPIC. Can also try compiling gnustep-base with libffi instead of ffcall. -- 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 475852] Review Request: gnustep-base - GNUstep Base library package
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=475852 --- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2009-03-02 22:19:10 EDT --- Same problem with F-10's gcc-objc 4.3.2 and upstream's gnustep-startup. If people are building fine on 32-bit systems, then it looks like gnustep-make's compiler flags are wrong 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 486757] Review Request: divine-mc - Multi-core model checking system for proving specifications
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=486757 --- Comment #3 from David A. Wheeler 2009-03-02 22:13:46 EDT --- Thanks. I've fixed it, including the ppc64 issue. It now packages for all architectures on both dist-f10 and dist-f11 (using koji build --scratch). The Rawhide problem was primarily because the new gcc 4.4 is much stricter about C++ headers. Basically, you HAVE to #include if you use stuff that's defined there (like EOF). In previous gcc's, many other #includes also quietly brought in these definitions. gcc's new behavior is correct, but I think we'll see LOTS of C++ patches for this Fedora release (!). There's also a change in the flex++ API that I had to resolve. This was unfun to work around, but I think I've got it. I also added throw() definitions for 2 mallocs as an optimization/cleanup, courtesy of some Ubuntu feedback. In the process, I think also managed to solve the ppc64 debuginfo problem. It turns out that if you invoke gcc with "-gstabs+", the debuginfo process will fail. This happens on x86_64 on rawhide, too. It's a known Fedora bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453506 Here's the koji scratch build for dist-f11: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1215612 Koji scratch build for dist-f10: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1215692 They're rpmlint-clean; I did rpmlint on the .spec, the SRPM, and divine-mc-1.3-3.fc11.x86_64.rpm. Here's the updated spec and SRPM: Spec URL: http://www.dwheeler.com/divine-mc.spec SRPM URL: http://www.dwheeler.com/divine-mc-1.3-3.fc10.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 488185] Review Request: php-pecl-selinux - SELinux binding for PHP scripts
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=488185 KaiGai Kohei changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://pecl.php.net/package ||/selinux CC||kai...@ak.jp.nec.com Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- 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 475852] Review Request: gnustep-base - GNUstep Base library package
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=475852
--- Comment #5 from Michel Alexandre Salim
2009-03-02 22:01:12 EDT ---
1.18.0 (latest stable release) does not currently build on F-10 with Rawhide's
gcc-objc 4.4.0:
Linking library libgnustep-base ...
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libm.so when searching for -lm
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libm.a when searching for -lm
/usr/bin/ld:
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../lib64/libcallback.a(misc.o):
relocation R_X86_64_32 against `a local symbol' can not be used when making a
shared object; recompile with -fPIC
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.4.0/../../../../lib64/libcallback.a: could
not read symbols: Bad value
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[2]: *** [obj/x86_64/linux-gnu/gnu-gnu-gnu/libgnustep-base.so.1.18.0] Error
1
This is bizarre, as -fPIC is in %{_libdir}/GNUstep/Makefiles/target.make:
$ grep -l fPIC /usr/lib64/GNUstep/Makefiles/*
/usr/lib64/GNUstep/Makefiles/target.make
Anyone knows what could be the problem? I'll try doing an install from the
upstream script, for comparison.
--
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 488185] New: Review Request: php-pecl-selinux - SELinux binding for PHP scripts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-selinux - SELinux binding for PHP scripts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488185 Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-selinux - SELinux binding for PHP scripts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: kai...@kaigai.gr.jp QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sepgsql.googlecode.com/files/php-pecl-selinux.spec SRPM URL: http://sepgsql.googlecode.com/files/php-selinux-0.1.2-devel.fc10.src.rpm Description: This package provides a set of interfaces to communicate between SELinux and PHP scripts via libselinux. It enables PHP scripts the following stuffs. - get/set a security context of processes and other resources - get/set system booleans - make a query for in-kernel security server - translate form of security context between 'raw' and 'translated' It shows the list of APIs: http://code.google.com/p/sepgsql/wiki/Memo_PHP_SELinux -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(peter...@redhat.c ||om) -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Huang Peng changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(phu...@redhat.com | |) | --- Comment #4 from Huang Peng 2009-03-02 21:45:07 EDT --- The db files are generated at buid-time but without index. It is for reducing the size of package files. The commands in %post is for creating the index. I think it 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 459211] Review Request: oolite - A space sim game, inspired by Elite
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=459211 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|459210 |475852 --- Comment #4 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2009-03-02 21:26:31 EDT --- Updating the blocker on the active gnustep-base review. Sorry for the delay, I was waiting for gnustep filesystem issues to be hashed out, hoping we could get the native GNUstep filesystem in, but it looks like it's flattened FHS-only for Fedora. -- 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 459210] Review Request: gnustep-base - GNUstep base package
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=459210 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|459211 | -- 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 475852] Review Request: gnustep-base - GNUstep Base library package
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=475852 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||459211 -- 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 485420] Review Request: openbios - Open Source implementation of IEEE 1275-1994
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=485420 --- Comment #8 from Glauber de Oliveira Costa 2009-03-02 21:21:11 EDT --- Peter, please take a look at http://glommer.fedorapeople.org/openbios-1.0-0.3.svn463.fc11.src.rpm http://glommer.fedorapeople.org/openbios.spec I had a nice idea of how to explore koji's new capabilities, and this is the result. Because of the conditional architecture, openbios-xxx will only be built in the architecture it was targeted for, and will then span to all other targets. If you want to have a better picture of what I'm talking about, there are koji builds at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1215501 (primary arches) http://sparc.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji//taskinfo?taskID=160708 (sparc) The only remaining issue, is the fact that sparc is a secondary architecture. And as of now, builds in secondary architectures don't reach primary ones. But this seems the best we can do 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 488103] Review Request: django-evolution - Schema evolution for Django
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=488103
Michel Alexandre Salim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(ivazquez...@gmail
||.com)
--- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim
2009-03-02 21:20:20 EDT ---
Almost ready -- everything is fine apart from the release number.
MUST
+ rpmlint: clean
+ package name: ok
+ spec file name
? package guideline-compliant
this should probably be 0.x.%{alphatag}%{?dist}
+ license complies with guidelines
+ license field accurate
+ license file not deleted
+ spec in US English
+ spec legible
+ source matches upstream
+ builds under >= 1 archs: noarch
+ build dependencies complete
+ own all directories
+ no dupes in %files
+ permission
+ %clean RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ macros used consistently
+ Package contains code
+ large docs => -doc: not that large
+ clean buildroot before install
+ filenames UTF-8
SHOULD
- desc and summary contain translations if available
+ package build in mock on all architectures
+ package functioned as described
+ scriplets are sane
+ require package not 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 487421] Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written 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=487421 --- Comment #9 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-02 21:05:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > I modelled my spec after libxml2, which split static out into it's own > package. > It really doesn't matter to me, so I'll just move it into the -devel package. > > Updated: > > Spec URL: http://jeckersb.fedorapeople.org/libyaml/libyaml.spec > SRPM URL: > http://jeckersb.fedorapeople.org/libyaml/libyaml-0.1.2-2.fc10.src.rpm > > Thanks for looking at this! I mean to say, static libraries generally are not allowed to be packaged. see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries I think this package is not following http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries_2 guidelines. I guess you need virtual provides. -- 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 487639] Review Request: armstrong - Powerful music sequencing library *** RENAMED PACKAGE ***
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=487639 Bug 487639 depends on bug 487637, which changed state. Bug 487637 Summary: Review Request: rtaudio - Real-time Audio I/O Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487637 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED 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 487637] Review Request: rtaudio - Real-time Audio I/O 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=487637 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #13 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2009-03-02 21:03:45 EDT --- thanks :) imported and built on rawhide and F-10. -- 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 487637] Review Request: rtaudio - Real-time Audio I/O 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=487637 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-02 20:58:11 EDT --- rtaudio-4.0.5-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rtaudio-4.0.5-3.fc10 -- 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 477570] Review Request: couchdb - A document database server, accessible via a RESTful JSON API
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=477570 Allisson Azevedo changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|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 402141] Review Request: tokyocabinet - A modern implementation of a DBM
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=402141 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #15 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:42:39 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 438609] Review Request: elisa-plugins-bad - Bad Plugins for the Elisa Media Center
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=438609 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #19 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:39:18 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 487312] Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
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=487312 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:40:53 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 485417] Review Request: bochs-bios - bios implementation from the bochs 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=485417 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #22 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:37:57 EDT --- cvs done (except for cc to virt-maint). -- 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 486698] Review Request: fedora-setup-keyboard - Hal keyboard layout callout
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=486698 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:36:18 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 458011] Review Request: ms-sys - Create DOS/MS-compatible boot records
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=458011 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com --- Comment #17 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-03-02 19:34:05 EDT --- I can't see anything that gives us permission to distribute or copy (or modify) these MBRs and boot records. This never should have been permitted into Fedora. I'm going to EOL it and block it from 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 479796] Review Request: ghc-haskell-src-exts - Library for Manipulating Haskell source
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=479796 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:34:55 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 485418] Review Request: vgabios - vga option rom for bochs/qemu
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=485418 Eduardo Habkost changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #21 from Eduardo Habkost 2009-03-02 19:31:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) > I don't see virt-maint in the list of cc lists we can add. It's fedora-virt-ma...@redhat.com. Can it be added? -- 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 487637] Review Request: rtaudio - Real-time Audio I/O 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=487637 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:33:44 EDT --- cvs done. (And congratuations!) -- 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 487421] Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written 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=487421 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:30:42 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 485418] Review Request: vgabios - vga option rom for bochs/qemu
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=485418 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #20 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:25:49 EDT --- I don't see virt-maint in the list of cc lists we can add. cvs done otherwise. -- 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 481732] Review Request: stardict-dic-cs_CZ - czech dictionary for stardict
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=481732 --- Comment #14 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:28:38 EDT --- Is the package name right here? The cvs request has 'stardict-english-czech', comment #11 has 'stardict-dic-cs_CZ'. -- 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 483615] Review Request: CodeAnalyst - Performance Analysis Suite for AMD-based System (based on Oprofile)
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=483615 --- Comment #14 from Suravee Suthikulpanit 2009-03-02 19:22:56 EDT --- I have posted the new SRPM and spec files here: Spec URL: http://ftp-developer.amd.com/user/ssuthiku/CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-3.fc11/CodeAnalyst-gui.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp-developer.amd.com/user/ssuthiku/CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-3.fc11/CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-3.fc11.src.rpm (From a scratch build against fc11 on Koji http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1215141) In this release, I have cleaned up spec file to make it easy to read and maintain. Rpmlint output is still the same as in comment #9. -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(phu...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen 2009-03-02 19:23:49 EDT --- First question that comes to mind is why are the db files generated at install time rather than build-time? Peng Huang, is that to save payload space? -- 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 483868] Review Request: iscan-firmware - Firmware for Epson flatbed scanners
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=483868 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:22:47 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 486584] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application - Framework for building reusable web-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=486584 --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman 2009-03-02 19:19:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > > This is an unofficial review: Thanks for investing your time on this review, Suravee. It's very much appreciated. > - The build return errors complaining "Test::More is not installed". Should be > part of the BuildRequires? Correct. I've uploaded another release (4.21-2) which corrects this. Spec URL: http://people.parinux.org/~seyman/fedora/perl-CGI-Application/perl-CGI-Application.spec SRPM URL: http://people.parinux.org/~seyman/fedora/perl-CGI-Application/perl-CGI-Application-4.21-2.fc10.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 486044] Review Request: php-pear-Config -Configuration file manipulation for 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=486044 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:14:52 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 477570] Review Request: couchdb - A document database server, accessible via a RESTful JSON API
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=477570 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:16:20 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 478364] Review Request: perl-Verilog-Readmem - Parse Verilog $readmemh or $readmemb text file
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=478364 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 19:17:24 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 488175] New: Package Review: ibus-table-extraphrase
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-extraphrase https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488175 Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-extraphrase Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: i18n Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: peter...@redhat.com ReportedBy: ccha...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, peter...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com, ccha...@redhat.com, phu...@redhat.com, fedora-i18n-b...@redhat.com Depends on: 488010 Blocks: 484650 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Clone Of: 488173 A split from ibus-table-chinese, which was sub-package of ibus-table. Uploading srpm and spec. -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488175 -- 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 488174] Review Request: nimbus-theme-gnome - The Nimbus theme originally from Sun
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=488174 --- Comment #1 from Matej Cepl 2009-03-02 19:14:06 EDT --- I am not sure about the name of the package -- is there any standard how these should be called? -- 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 488173] New: Package Review: ibus-table-erbi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-erbi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488173 Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-erbi Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: i18n Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: peter...@redhat.com ReportedBy: ccha...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, peter...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com, ccha...@redhat.com, phu...@redhat.com, fedora-i18n-b...@redhat.com Depends on: 488010 Blocks: 484650 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #488172 +++ A split from ibus-table-chinese, which was sub-package of ibus-table. Uploading srpm and spec. -- 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 488174] New: Review Request: nimbus-theme-gnome - The Nimbus theme originally from Sun
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: nimbus-theme-gnome - The Nimbus theme originally from Sun https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488174 Summary: Review Request: nimbus-theme-gnome - The Nimbus theme originally from Sun Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mc...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/nimbus-theme-gnome.spec SRPM URL: http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/nimbus-theme-gnome-0.0.17-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The nimbus theme pack for Gnome make use of nimbus Metacity theme, nimbus gtk2 theme and Icon set. It originates from Opensolaris. -- 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 453412] Review Request: gtk-aurora-engine - Aurora theme engine for gtk2
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=453412 Felix Kaechele changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fe...@fetzig.org --- Comment #6 from Felix Kaechele 2009-03-02 19:12:52 EDT --- Is anybody still working on this? -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488173 -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 --- Comment #2 from Caius "kaio" Chance 2009-03-02 19:08:57 EDT --- Changed Requires: from ibus to ibus-table. Same URL of comment #1. -- 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 488100] Firebird SQL database management system
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=488100 --- Comment #7 from Itamar Reis Peixoto 2009-03-02 19:08:47 EDT --- you need to do a hard work to get your review request approved, I will try to help you. FIRST ---> do you have a fedora account ? if yes, what's your FAS username ? if not get one here. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ l@@k ---> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Get_a_Fedora_Account -- 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 426751] Review Request: ghc-X11 - A Haskell binding to the X11 graphics 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=426751 --- Comment #57 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-03-02 19:05:45 EDT --- Jens, don't forget, i need sponsoring. -- 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 488172] New: Package Review: ibus-table-wubi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-wubi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488172 Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-wubi Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: i18n Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: peter...@redhat.com ReportedBy: ccha...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, peter...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com, ccha...@redhat.com, phu...@redhat.com, fedora-i18n-b...@redhat.com Depends on: 488010 Blocks: 484650 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- A split from ibus-table-chinese, which was sub-package of ibus-table. Uploading srpm and spec. -- 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 488172] Package Review: ibus-table-zhengma
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=488172 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Package Review: |Package Review: |ibus-table-wubi |ibus-table-zhengma -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 488168] Package Review: ibus-table-wubi
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=488168 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||488010 -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488168 -- 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 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488172 -- 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 488168] New: Package Review: ibus-table-wubi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-wubi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488168 Summary: Package Review: ibus-table-wubi Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: i18n Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: peter...@redhat.com ReportedBy: ccha...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, peter...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com, ccha...@redhat.com, phu...@redhat.com, fedora-i18n-b...@redhat.com Blocks: 484650 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? A split from ibus-table-chinese, which was sub-package of ibus-table. Uploading srpm and spec. -- 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 487913] Review Request: culmus-fancy-fonts - Fancy fonts for Hebrew
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=487913
Nicolas Mailhot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||fedora-fonts-bugs-l...@redh
||at.com
Blocks||477387
Depends on||173897
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nicolas.mail...@laposte.net
Flag||fedora-review?,
||needinfo?(dan...@cs.technio
||n.ac.il)
--- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-03-02
18:43:20 EDT ---
First review pass (builds in mock, good)
1. various rpmlint warnings, of which only the following need to be fixed
culmus-fancy-fonts.src: E: invalid-spec-name
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:84: E: files-attr-not-set
A file or a directory entry in a %files section does not have attributes set
which may result in security issues in the resulting binary package depending
on the system where the package is built. Add default attributes using
%defattr before it in the %files section, or use per line %attr's.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:157: W: setup-not-quiet
Use the -q option to the %setup macro to avoid useless build output from
unpacking the sources.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:158: W: setup-not-quiet
Use the -q option to the %setup macro to avoid useless build output from
unpacking the sources.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:159: W: setup-not-quiet
Use the -q option to the %setup macro to avoid useless build output from
unpacking the sources.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:160: W: setup-not-quiet
Use the -q option to the %setup macro to avoid useless build output from
unpacking the sources.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:161: W: setup-not-quiet
Use the -q option to the %setup macro to avoid useless build output from
unpacking the sources.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:162: W: setup-not-quiet
Use the -q option to the %setup macro to avoid useless build output from
unpacking the sources.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src:163: W: setup-not-quiet
Use the -q option to the %setup macro to avoid useless build output from
unpacking the sources.
culmus-fancy-fonts.src: W: no-%build-section
The spec file does not contain a %build section. Even if some packages don't
directly need it, section markers may be overridden in rpm's configuration to
provide additional "under the hood" functionality, such as injection of
automatic -debuginfo subpackages. Add the section, even if empty.
fonts-hebrew-fancy-compat.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot Compatibility files
of Culmus fancy font families.
Summary ends with a dot.
2. please use OTF over Type1 whenever possible
3.
a. we prefer for fonts released in different archives to be packaged
separately (different rpms and srpms).
b. also, I don't think Legal would appreciate the way you drop every licensing
file but one.
c. lastly, the different fonts actually have different timestamps so your
version is misleading
However there is a tolerance for fonts that used to be packaged in a single
srpm so you may avail yourself of it if you really want to. Still, I don't
think that's a good idea. 7 simple packages can be easier to manage than a
monster one (and are actually quicker to review)
4. It would be a good idea to contact upstream and make it add the FSF font
exception to their licensing
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal_considerations_for_fonts#Good_font_licenses_allow_embedding
5. the rpm in rawhide allows you to drop the duplicate Group declarations in
subpackages
6. FPC and FESCO have decided %define-s should be replaced by %global-s (cf
fontpackages-devel 1.20)
7. You do not need this
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-fonts-common < %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-comix-no2-fonts < %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-dorian-fonts < %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-gan-fonts < %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-gladia-fonts < %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-ktav-yad-fonts < %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-ozrad-fonts < %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: %{fontname}-anka-fonts < %{version}-%{release}
8. You should not need this
Provides: fonts-hebrew-fancy = %{version}-%{release}
9. Please only obsolete the last version of fonts-hebrew-fancy built in koji +
1
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_%E2%80%94_renaming_or_splitting_packages
10. Your compat subpackage need not require common, it'll be pulled in by the
others
11. You're supposed to add something specific to each font subpackage under
%common_desc
[Bug 488010] Package Review: ibus-table-cangjie
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=488010 Caius "kaio" Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||peter...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Caius "kaio" Chance 2009-03-02 18:40:26 EDT --- http://fedorapeople.org/~cchance/packaging/ibus-table-cangjie-1.1.0.20090220-1.fc11.src.rpm http://fedorapeople.org/~cchance/packaging/ibus-table-cangjie.spec -- 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 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
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=487392 --- Comment #8 from Adam Williamson 2009-03-02 18:31:34 EDT --- sorry, somehow I missed those two. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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 467365] Review Request: reinteract - interactive Python shell
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=467365 --- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2009-03-02 18:21:56 EDT --- I looked into the matter some more, and it looks like I could just update the existing 0install script for Reinteract, and make sure it pulls Python 2.5 *and* GTK+ -- it'd be annoyingly big, but doable. -- 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 225788] Merge Review: gedit
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=225788
manuel wolfshant changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant 2009-03-02
18:07:48 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: devel/x86_64
[x] Rpmlint output:
source RPM:
gedit.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 30, tab: line 18)
==> cosmetic, but please fix
gedit.src: W: %ifarch-applied-patch Patch1: gedit-2.13.90-libdir.patch
=> ignorable, fixes the autotools chain
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
binary RPM:
gedit.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/gedit.schemas
gedit.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/gconf/schemas/gedit-file-browser.schemas
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
=> those are ignorable, if memory serves well. right?
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[!] License field in the
package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPLv2+ and GFDL
See note 1
[x] 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 is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of source file: 54feda7411f32d401d075c160fc5b9c16f58e8f4
gedit-2.25.7.tar.bz2
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[x] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Final provides and requires are sane.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: koji build (it passed the F11 rebuild phase)
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: all archs supported by koji
[x] Package functions as described.
[x] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the test passes.
=== Issues ===
1. There is a minor cosmetic fix needed in order to make rpmlint happier:
mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 30, tab: line 18)
2. The spec does not use parallel build. If it is not supported, please note it
in the spec, otherwise please use it.
3. There are some duplicate BRs:
glib2-devel (by pango-devel), automake (
[Bug 487067] Review Request: autopsy - Graphical front end for The Sleuth Kit Forensics software
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=487067 --- Comment #2 from manuel wolfshant 2009-03-02 17:39:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > - Installation failed > rpm -Uvh ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/autopsy-2.21-1.fc10.noarch.rpm > error: Failed dependencies: > perl(Main) is needed by autopsy-2.21-1.fc10.noarch > perl(conf.pl) is needed by autopsy-2.21-1.fc10.noarch > perl(define.pl) is needed by autopsy-2.21-1.fc10.noarch > perl(lib::define.pl) is needed by autopsy-2.21-1.fc10.noarch > perl(search.pl) is needed by autopsy-2.21-1.fc10.noarch Suravee, please use "yum install" when testing if packages can be installed. "rpm -Uvh" might lead to false conclusions due to the fact that it does not try to pull in dependencies from the repositories. -- 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 485542] Review Request: breip-font - The Breip handwriting-style cursive font
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=485542 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 484057] Review Request: epigrafica-fonts - The Epigrafica font family.
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=484057 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 486680] Review Request: chisholm-banana-peels-fonts - A Decorative Serif Font
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=486680 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 486680] Review Request: chisholm-banana-peels-fonts - A Decorative Serif Font
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=486680 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nicolas.mail...@laposte.net -- 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 485542] Review Request: breip-font - The Breip handwriting-style cursive font
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=485542 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nicolas.mail...@laposte.net -- 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 484057] Review Request: epigrafica-fonts - The Epigrafica font family.
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=484057 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nicolas.mail...@laposte.net -- 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 486977] Review Request: gnu-free-fonts
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=486977
Nicolas Mailhot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||fedora-fonts-bugs-l...@redh
||at.com
Depends on||212079
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nicolas.mail...@laposte.net
Flag||fedora-review?,
||needinfo?(l...@jcomserv.net
||)
--- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-03-02
17:18:04 EDT ---
Thank you very much for working on this. Here is a first review pass:
1. FPC and FESCO have decided %global was preferred over %define. The changes
are in fontpackages 1.20, please apply them
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define
2. Please try to keep the same declaration order as the templates, that makes
diffing & reviewing easier
3. Please do not make a metapackage of the main package, if you need a
metapackage for upgrade paths create a -compat subpackage that we'll be able to
kill at F12 time
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_%E2%80%94_renaming_or_splitting_packages#Can.27t_I_use_my_old_package_name_instead_of_a_-compat_subpackage.3F
vera, mgopen, dejavu, liberation, etc all use this proven pattern
4. you can probably drop the
Obsoletes: freefont-ttf < %{version}-%{release}
freefont has been named freefont in Fedora for quite a long time
5. In rawhide you can drop the
Group:User Interface/X
declarations in subpackages
6. use the
%package -n %{fontname}--fonts
%description -n %{fontname}--fonts
%_font_pkg -n -f %{fontconf}-.conf *.ttf
which is documented in the templates if you want stuff to actually work
7. put doc in the common package, that's one of its main uses
8. BuildRequire fontforge
9. You'll likely hit
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-fonts-list/2009-February/msg00076.html
too
10. Please add fontconfig rules to each font subpackages. In your case that's
probably just taking the
/usr/share/fontconfig/templates/basic-font-template.conf
template and filling in font names
11. Please also make sure you've not forgotten a step in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_%E2%80%94_renaming_or_splitting_packages#Source_package_naming_changes
That's all I see right now, I may have missed something else, multi-font
packages can be trickier than mono-font ones. But first fix this please
--
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 212079] Review Request: freefont - Free UCS Outline Fonts
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=212079 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||486977 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480724] Review Request: djbdns - A Domain Name System by D. J. Bernstein
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=480724 Mark Johnson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||johns...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Mark Johnson 2009-03-02 17:09:30 EDT --- Here is a maintained fork of djbdns (and daemontools and ucspi-tcp): http://sourceforge.net/projects/zinq DISCLAIMER: I'm the maintainer / originator of said fork. -- 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 488100] Firebird SQL database management system
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=488100 --- Comment #6 from MERCIER 2009-03-02 17:07:20 EDT --- some link: - http://www.firebirdnews.org/ - http://www.ibphoenix.com/ - http://www.firebirdsql.org/ -- 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 486269] Review Request: levien-inconsolata-fonts - Inconsolata fonts
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=486269 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-02 16:52:02 EDT --- Built in rawhide and old package marked dead. -- 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 488106] Review Request: django-notification - User notification management for the Django web 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=488106 Dimitris Glezos changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488151 -- 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 488101] Review Request: django-contact-form - An extensible contact-form application for Django
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=488101 Dimitris Glezos changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488151 -- 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 488103] Review Request: django-evolution - Schema evolution for Django
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=488103 Dimitris Glezos changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488151 -- 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 488099] Review Request: python-polib - A library to parse and manage gettext catalogs
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=488099 Dimitris Glezos changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||488151 -- 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
