[Bug 499409] Review Request: jargs - Java command line option parsing suite

[bugzilla]

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=499409





--- Comment #13 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-05-18 03:02:19 
EDT ---
ping?

-- 
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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130


Jussi Lehtola  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de




-- 
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 501228] New: Review Request: mod_selinux - An apache module to launch web applications with restrictive privileges

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: mod_selinux - An apache module to launch web 
applications with restrictive privileges

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501228

   Summary: Review Request: mod_selinux - An apache module to
launch web applications with restrictive privileges
   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/mod_selinux.spec_v2.2.1903
SRPM URL:
http://sepgsql.googlecode.com/files/mod_selinux-2.2.1903-1.fc11.src.rpm

Description:
The Apache/SELinux plus is an extra module (mod_selinux.so) which enables
to launch contents-handler (it means both of references to static contents
and invocations of web applications) with individual and restrictive
privileges set, based on http authentication.
The mod_selinux.so generates a one-time worker thread for each request,
and it assigns the worker restrictive domain based on the authentication
prior to launching contents handlers.
It means we can apply valid access controls on web-applications, and
makes assurance operating system can prevent violated accesses, even if
web application contains security bugs or vulnerabilities.

-- 
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 501228] Review Request: mod_selinux - An apache module to launch web applications with restrictive privileges

[bugzilla]

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=501228





--- Comment #1 from KaiGai Kohei   2009-05-18 04:03:22 EDT 
---
The rpmlint says as follows:

[kai...@masu ~]$ rpmlint
/usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i586/mod_selinux-2.2.1903-1.fc11.i586.rpm
mod_selinux.i586: E: explicit-lib-dependency libselinux
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.

The mod_selinux requires libselinux but I didn't note an explicit earliest
version number because it is now unclear when getcon_raw()/setcon_raw() is
included into libselinux package.
(At least, it was already merged in the period of Fedora *Core*.)

Is it allowed to restrict it on somewhere enough new version (e.g libselinux >=
2.0.0)?

-- 
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 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero

[bugzilla]

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=500922





--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System   
2009-05-18 04:21:59 EDT ---
zerofree-1.0.1-5.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zerofree-1.0.1-5.fc11

-- 
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 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero

[bugzilla]

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=500922





--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System   
2009-05-18 04:20:34 EDT ---
zerofree-1.0.1-5.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zerofree-1.0.1-5.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 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero

[bugzilla]

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=500922





--- Comment #23 from Richard W.M. Jones   2009-05-18 
04:42:21 EDT ---
Bit of a build problem in EL-5 on ppc at the moment.
I need to ask someone in rel-eng to take a look.

http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-5-epel/2328-zerofree-1.0.1-5.el5/ppc/root.log

-- 
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 501251] New: Review Request: perl-Tk-Stderr - Capture standard error output, display in separate window for Perl::Tk

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: perl-Tk-Stderr - Capture standard error output, 
display in separate window for Perl::Tk

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501251

   Summary: Review Request: perl-Tk-Stderr - Capture standard
error output, display in separate window for Perl::Tk
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: low
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: david.hanneq...@gmail.com
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: http://hvad.cfppa-cibeins.com/perl-Tk-Stderr/perl-Tk-Stderr.spec
SRPM URL:
http://hvad.cfppa-cibeins.com/perl-Tk-Stderr/perl-Tk-Stderr-1.2-2.fc10.src.rpm
Description: This module captures that standard error of a program and
redirects it to a read only text widget, which doesn't appear until necessary.
When it does appear, the user can close it; it'll appear again when there is
more output.

-- 
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 494199] Review Request: drascula-international - Subtitles for Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back

[bugzilla]

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=494199


Hans de Goede  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE




--- Comment #11 from Hans de Goede   2009-05-18 05:28:41 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> cvs done.  

Thanks! Imported and build, closing.

-- 
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 494197] Review Request: drascula-music - Background music for Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back

[bugzilla]

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=494197


Hans de Goede  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE




--- Comment #10 from Hans de Goede   2009-05-18 05:28:28 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> cvs done.  

Thanks! Imported and build, closing.

-- 
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 491616] Review Request: mingw32-zfstream - MinGW Windows C++ abstraction library for compressed and non-compressed file I/O

[bugzilla]

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=491616





--- Comment #8 from Wojciech Pilorz   2009-05-18 07:00:01 
EDT ---
No, not yet

-- 
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 493001] Review Request: imgtarget - ImgTarget is a front-end to functionality provided by ArgyllCMS

[bugzilla]

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=493001





--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System   
2009-05-18 07:38:15 EDT ---
imgtarget-0.1.4-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/imgtarget-0.1.4-3.fc11

-- 
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 493001] Review Request: imgtarget - ImgTarget is a front-end to functionality provided by ArgyllCMS

[bugzilla]

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=493001





--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System   
2009-05-18 07:38:09 EDT ---
imgtarget-0.1.4-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/imgtarget-0.1.4-3.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 458090] Review Request: LuxRender - Lux Renderer, an unbiased rendering system

[bugzilla]

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=458090


Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Comment #35 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)   2009-05-18 
07:46:11 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #34)
> I have build the -22 release for F-11 and F-10. It will be nice, if you can
> bundeled it which your update request.
OK, I've just imported LuxRender.
> 
> At least I want to offer you the co-maintainership for blender if you want.  
Thx, I accept.

I guess I need to be approved on the blender acl in order to request an update.
So I will update both blender/LuxRender then.


Thx for this 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 493001] Review Request: imgtarget - ImgTarget is a front-end to functionality provided by ArgyllCMS

[bugzilla]

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=493001


Zarko (grof)  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 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero

[bugzilla]

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=500922


Richard W.M. Jones  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE




--- Comment #24 from Richard W.M. Jones   2009-05-18 
08:03:36 EDT ---
Seemed to be a temporary blib, and zerofree is now built in EL-5
too.

http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-5-epel/2330-zerofree-1.0.1-5.el5/

Thanks everyone for helping, particularly Jussi for the detailed and
useful 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 500252] Pre-Review Request: plexus-mail-sender - Plexus Archiver Component

[bugzilla]

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=500252





--- Comment #7 from Tom "spot" Callaway   2009-05-18 
08:09:57 EDT ---
We still need some confirmation from upstream as to what the license is on the
unmarked files. I'm also not sure why you added the "Plexus" license to the
list of files in this package, when you only found MIT and ASL 2.0.

-- 
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 501006] Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for xine-lib

[bugzilla]

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=501006


Ville Skyttä  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ville.sky...@iki.fi




--- Comment #18 from Ville Skyttä   2009-05-18 08:58:02 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > * Scriptlets
> >   - Update GTK icon cache update scriptlets:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
> 
> This was already partly done, but I rewrote the part to use the snippets 
> above.

The "touch --no-create ..." %post part appears to be missing.

-- 
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 498073] Review Request: python-ekg - Community Health Reporter

[bugzilla]

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=498073


Jeroen van Meeuwen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||kana...@kanarip.com
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kana...@kanarip.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 501006] Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for xine-lib

[bugzilla]

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=501006





--- Comment #19 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-05-18 
09:10:41 EDT ---
Oops, I also missed it on my review, sorry...

-- 
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 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library

[bugzilla]

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=456353





--- Comment #8 from Jarod Wilson   2009-05-18 09:33:14 EDT 
---
As of yesterday, now -rc2 is available. Doubt this will make it into the F11
release media, but at least we have a new enough jack now, so it could easily
be an F11 update... Updated rc2 packages here:

http://wilsonet.com/packages/libffado/libffado.spec
http://wilsonet.com/packages/libffado/libffado-2.0-0.4.rc2.fc11.src.rpm

Builds on F11-x86_64 just fine, haven't tested anything beyond that yet.

-- 
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 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television

[bugzilla]

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=500926


Bug 500926 depends on bug 501006, which changed state.

Bug 501006 Summary: Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for 
xine-lib
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501006

   What|Old Value   |New Value

 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 501006] Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for xine-lib

[bugzilla]

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=501006


Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Comment #20 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-05-18 
09:46:45 EDT ---
Now closing.
(Please fix GTK icon cache updating scriptlets, sorry)

-- 
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 496117] Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB

[bugzilla]

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=496117





--- Comment #6 from Daniel Walsh   2009-05-18 10:21:44 EDT 
---
Adam, 

Ted has written python bindings for XCB, could you add them to your
package.

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

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

[Bug 496117] Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB

[bugzilla]

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=496117


Daniel Walsh  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mno...@redhat.com
  Component|Package Review  |xcb-util
 AssignedTo|dwa...@redhat.com   |mno...@redhat.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 496117] Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB

[bugzilla]

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=496117





--- Comment #5 from Daniel Walsh   2009-05-18 10:20:31 EDT 
---
Michael, Ted has written python bindings for XCB, could you add them to your
package.

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

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

[Bug 496117] Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB

[bugzilla]

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=496117


Daniel Walsh  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Component|xcb-util|libxcb
 AssignedTo|mno...@redhat.com   |a...@redhat.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 500252] Pre-Review Request: plexus-mail-sender - Plexus Archiver Component

[bugzilla]

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=500252





--- Comment #8 from Jerry James   2009-05-18 10:19:36 EDT 
---
In response to comment #6, please refer back to comment #2.  There are 6 (not
4) files under an ASL license and they contain ASL 1.1 (not ASL 2.0) notices. 
There is no file in this distribution with an ASL 2.0 license notice.  (Three
of the 6 are test files, but that still makes 3, not 4, source files with the
ASL 1.1 license.)

-- 
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 500253] Pre-Review Request: directory-naming - Directory Naming

[bugzilla]

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=500253


Jerry James  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |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 500253] Pre-Review Request: directory-naming - Directory Naming

[bugzilla]

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=500253


Jerry James  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com




--- Comment #3 from Jerry James   2009-05-18 10:24:28 EDT 
---
Looks good.  This one is 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 496117] Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB

[bugzilla]

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=496117





--- Comment #7 from Michal Nowak   2009-05-18 10:45:24 EDT 
---
I guess this should be separate package, as xcb-util is. Looks like the release
cycle of xpyb is different from libxcb's. And, e.g., in Gentoo it is a separate
package [1].

[1] http://packages.gentoo.org/package/x11-libs/xpyb

-- 
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 225988] Merge Review: libavc1394

[bugzilla]

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=225988





--- Comment #3 from Jarod Wilson   2009-05-18 11:08:46 EDT 
---
Sadly, --disable-static doesn't work, and dropping the autoreconf results in
hard-coded rpaths. Don't have time to chase this further at the moment, but I
think I've cleaned up just about everything else now, and will commit to the
devel branch shortly...

$ rpmlint libavc1394-0.5.3-6.fc12.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint *.rpm
libavc1394-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

-- 
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 490722] Review Request: R-BSgenome - Infrastructure for Biostrings-based genome data packages

[bugzilla]

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=490722





--- Comment #6 from Pierre-YvesChibon   2009-05-18 
11:09:30 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Fedora review R-BSgenome-1.10.5-1.fc10.src.rpm (2009-05-11)

> ! However it is not the latest version (1.12.0 is available for BioC 2.4)

> ! BuildRequires and Requires look sane, but
> 
>   Is the "Requires: R-biobase" appropriate? It is not listed as a
>   Depends or Imports on the package web site. (It will be dragged in
>   as a dependency of the R-Biostrings package which is a direct
>   dependency)
> 

Corrected in :
Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-BSgenome.spec
SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-BSgenome-1.12.0-1.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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #4 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
11:09:50 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)

> I want to package drbdlinks for all active branches and this is only possible
> without macro usage currently, look for %{_initrddir} vs. %{_initdir} or so.

I thought, all rpm macros defined by the packaging guildlines should be
available on EPEL too.

> > - Who should owned %{_sysconfdir}/ha.d ?
> 
> Heartbeat owns that directory. But heartbeat is optional, drbdlinks can be
> used with and without.

Please ask maintainer to create a filesystem subpackage of heartbeat. This
subpackage should contains all directories which are common for heartbeat and
yours. Your package should depends on this package.

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

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

[Bug 500492] Review Request: dbus-cxx - C++ wrapper for dbus

[bugzilla]

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=500492


Rick L Vinyard Jr  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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #5 from Robert Scheck   2009-05-18 
11:16:25 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Please ask maintainer to create a filesystem subpackage of heartbeat. This
> subpackage should contains all directories which are common for heartbeat and
> yours. Your package should depends on this package.  

Hum? IMHO that behaves same as for /etc/logrotate.d/* or /etc/cron.d/* files.
It's a dependency, that can be satisfied, but must not necessarily.

-- 
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 496117] Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB

[bugzilla]

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=496117





--- Comment #8 from Ted X Toth   2009-05-18 11:39:09 EDT ---
Just to clarify I'm not the originator of this code Eamon Walsh at NSA is but
he can't be a maintainer so I took on the task of trying to get this integrated
since I'm relying on it. Also I wasn't aware until now that there was a Gentoo
package and it probably wouldn't be a good idea to have the same code with
different package names but what do I know.

-- 
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 501251] Review Request: perl-Tk-Stderr - Capture standard error output, display in separate window for Perl::Tk

[bugzilla]

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=501251


Jochen Schmitt  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
11:54:28 EDT ---
Good:
+ Basename of the SPEC files matches with package name.
+ Package name fullfill the naming guidelines.
+ URL shows on proper project home page
+ Package contains most recent release of the application
+ Could download upstream sources via spectool -g
+ Package tar ball matches which upstream sources
(md5sum: 86f0f85d24d2c1e72e1e5a039b0f0d72)
+ Package contains proper license tag
+ License tag contains GPLv2 as a valid OSS license
+ Package has proper Buildroot defintion
+ BuildRoot will be clean on start of %clean and %install
+ Package is BuiildArch noarch
+ Package has not subpackages
+ Package contains a %check stanza
+ Local build works fine
+ Rpmlint is quiete on source rpm
+ rpmlint is quiete on binary rpm
+ Local install and uninstall works fine
+ %doc stanza is small, so we don't need extra doc subpackage
+ %files stanza has proper %defattr definition
+ Files have proper files permissions
+ All package files are owned by the package
+ No packaged file is owned by another package
+ Package has proper Changelog

Bad:
- BR perl is not requires, because perl(Tk) requires perl
- Package doesn't contains verbatin copy of the license text
- Source files doesn't contains copyright notes
- README says package should have the same license as perl
  Perl is GPLV2 and Artistic. Please clarify license with
  upstream.
- Koji build fails. Please see
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1361022
  I assume, that we have to deactivate the %check stanza

-- 
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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #6 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
11:59:33 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)

> Hum? IMHO that behaves same as for /etc/logrotate.d/* or /etc/cron.d/* files.
> It's a dependency, that can be satisfied, but must not necessarily.  

Don't tell me anything about old packages which we have perhaps since RH 7 or
so. You should know, that this old packages didn't follow the current packaging
guidelines. That is the reason why we have the so-called merge review.

For a new package I want, the each file/directory should owned by a package.

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

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

[Bug 500254] Pre-Review Request: jakarta-commons-jxpath - Simple XPath interpreter

[bugzilla]

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=500254





--- Comment #2 from Fernando Nasser   2009-05-18 12:03:43 
EDT ---
Fixed license.

Provided intructions for obtaining source and refresh source tar ball

Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/jakarta-commons-jxpath.spec

SRPM URL:
http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/jakarta-commons-jxpath-1.2-6.jpp6.src.rpm

Thanks a lot for the review and improvement suggestions.

-- 
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 500256] Pre-Review Request: jakarta-commons-configuration - Commons Configuration Package

[bugzilla]

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=500256





--- Comment #2 from Fernando Nasser   2009-05-18 12:11:38 
EDT ---
Spec URL: 
http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/jakarta-commons-configuration.spec

SRPM URL:
http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/jakarta-commons-configuration-1.4-4.jpp6.src.rpm

Thanks for the pre-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 500253] Pre-Review Request: directory-naming - Directory Naming

[bugzilla]

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=500253


Rudolf Kastl  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||che...@gmail.com




--- Comment #4 from Rudolf Kastl   2009-05-18 12:09:37 EDT ---
i thought that those jpp tags are supposed to be removed 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 501098] Review Request: perl-XML-RSS-LibXML - XML::RSS with XML::LibXML

[bugzilla]

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=501098


Iain Arnell  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




-- 
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 501099] Review Request: perl-XML-Feed - Syndication feed parser and auto-discovery

[bugzilla]

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=501099





--- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell   2009-05-18 12:20:28 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: perl-XML-Feed
Short Description: Syndication feed parser and auto-discovery
Owners: iarnell
Branches: F-10 F-11
InitialCC: perl-sig

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

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

[Bug 225988] Merge Review: libavc1394

[bugzilla]

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=225988





--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-05-18 12:19:20 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Sadly, --disable-static doesn't work, and dropping the autoreconf results in
> hard-coded rpaths. Don't have time to chase this further at the moment, but I
> think I've cleaned up just about everything else now, and will commit to the
> devel branch shortly...

Can't you just sed it away from libtool?

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Removing_Rpath

-- 
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 501098] Review Request: perl-XML-RSS-LibXML - XML::RSS with XML::LibXML

[bugzilla]

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=501098





--- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell   2009-05-18 12:20:17 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: perl-XML-RSS-LibXML
Short Description: XML::RSS with XML::LibXML
Owners: iarnell
Branches: F-10 F-11
InitialCC: perl-sig

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

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

[Bug 501099] Review Request: perl-XML-Feed - Syndication feed parser and auto-discovery

[bugzilla]

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=501099


Iain Arnell  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




-- 
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 500257] Pre-Review Request: easymock - Easy mock objects

[bugzilla]

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=500257





--- Comment #2 from Fernando Nasser   2009-05-18 12:22:42 
EDT ---
Updated instructions for obtaining source tar ball.

Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/easymock.spec

SRPM URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~fnasser/easymock-1.2-9.jpp6.src.rpm

Thanks for the pre-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 501228] Review Request: mod_selinux - An apache module to launch web applications with restrictive privileges

[bugzilla]

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=501228


Jochen Schmitt  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #2 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
12:44:36 EDT ---
Good:
+ Basename of the SPEC file matches with package name.
+ Package name fullfill naming guidelines
+ URL tag show on proper project home page.
+ Could download upstream tar ball via spectool -g
+ Package contains valid License tag
+ License tag state ASL 2.0 as a valid OSS license
+ Package contains verbatin copy of the license tag
+ License in the source file header matches with license tag
+ Package tar ball matches with upstream
(md5sum: 855b8b05fd71b39277f2ffbe4c7ae376)
+ Rpmlint is quiete on source rpm
+ Package contains smp-enabled build step
+ Package contains no subpackages
+ Package has proper defintion of Buildroot
+ Buildroot will be cleaned on the start of %clean and %install
+ %doc stanza is small, so we need no extra doc subpackage
+ %files stanza have proper %defattr statemend
+ %files standza haven't duplicated file entries
+ All package files are owned by the package
+ No package files belong to another package
+ Package has proper %Changelog 

Bad:
- Package fails on koji (pleas see:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1361107)
  This happens only for 64-bit architectures
- Package could no build localy on F-10 because of dependencies

-- 
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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #7 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
12:56:52 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)

> - don't put a file on %{_localstatedir}/run. 
>   you should only create a directory on it

Please at a the line

%{_localstatedir}/run/%{name}/

on the files stanza, so that directory and all directory belongs will be 
owned by this package.

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

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

[Bug 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves

[bugzilla]

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=476398





--- Comment #48 from Conrad Meyer   2009-05-18 13:06:40 EDT 
---
Ok, I'll fix this later today (to shared-only).

-- 
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 225988] Merge Review: libavc1394

[bugzilla]

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=225988





--- Comment #5 from Jarod Wilson   2009-05-18 13:17:07 EDT 
---
Just took a quick look. Yes, the sed route works. Committed changes to drop the
autofoo and libtool BR and the autoreconf'ing.

-- 
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 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat application

[bugzilla]

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=497441





--- Comment #65 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-05-18 
13:15:56 EDT ---
For -11:

* Again user directory for mumble-server:
  - As said above, using %{buildroot} cannot be accepted here
because %buildroot should be used only when building
this package, and when installing murmur binary rpm
this directory (%buildroot) is not expected to exist.

Please change this to "-d %{_localstatedir}/lib/mumble-server"

! Scriptlets
  - By the way is "condrestart" scriptlets at "%postun" unneeded
for murmur service? If it is preferable to add this,
please check %postun example on
   
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript#Initscripts_in_spec_file_scriptlets

* %{name}-server symlink
---
ln -s ../sbin/murmurd %{buildroot}%{_sbindir}/%{name}-server
---
  - As murmurd and %{name}-server are now in the same directory,
this can be simplified to:
---
ln -s murmurd %{buildroot}%{_sbindir}/%{name}-server
---

Now:
-
NOTE: Before being sponsored:

This package will be accepted with another few work. 
But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) 
must sponsor you.

Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other 
submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. 
For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) 
are required to "show that you have an understanding 
of the process and of the packaging guidelines" as is described
on :
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored

Usually there are two ways to show this.
A. submit other review requests with enough quality.
B. Do a "pre-review" of other person's review request
   (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do
   a formal review)

When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other 
person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report 
so that I can check your comments or review request.

Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to
review can be checked on my wiki page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mtasaka#B._Review_request_tickets
(Check "No one is reviewing")

Review guidelines are described mainly on:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets


-- 
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 498723] Review Request: eZ Publish

[bugzilla]

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=498723


Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |




--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-05-18 
13:20:11 EDT ---
(The submitter cannot be the reviewer and should not set
 fedora-review flag by yourself)

-- 
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 498721] Review Request: php-ezc-Webdav - eZ Components Webdav

[bugzilla]

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=498721


Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |




--- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-05-18 
13:19:11 EDT ---
(The submitter cannot be the reviewer and should not set
 fedora-review flag by yourself)

-- 
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 490354] Review Request: emacs-elib - The Emacs Lisp Library

[bugzilla]

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=490354


Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de




-- 
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 478613] Review Request: ledger - A powerful command-line double-entry accounting system

[bugzilla]

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=478613


Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|michel.syl...@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 501353] New: Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request:  - 

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501353

   Summary: Review Request:  - 
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: balaji...@gmail.com
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: 
SRPM URL:
http://balajig8.fedorapeople.org/packages/ascii/ascii-3.8-1.fc10.src.rpm>
Description: 

Hi 

I just finished packaging Ascii which is my first package and I would
appreciate a review so that i could add this into fedora .

Ascii is one of the packages mentioned in the Package Wishlist.

Thanks for your time.

Thanks,
Cheers,
Balaji

-- 
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 501353] Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

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=501353





--- Comment #1 from Balaji G   2009-05-18 13:30:42 EDT ---
It would be great if some could sponsor me as this is my first package.

Thanks,
Cheers,
Balaji

-- 
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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #8 from Robert Scheck   2009-05-18 
13:48:18 EDT ---
Ah, I mis-got you there - sorry. It should be %{_localstatedir}/run/%{name}/
of course, my packaging mistake. Anything else except that and /etc/ha.d/-mess?

Regarding %{_initrddir} vs. %{_initdir}: %{_initrddir} lives on EL-4/5, while
%{_initdir} lives on F-10/F-11/Rawhide. Thus two different macros, but EPEL is
getting often ignored by packagers, so it doesn't matter for many. And if you
don't want to mess with macro stuff inside spec file or make individual changes
per branch, /etc/rc.d/init/ is now the only sane and really readable way inside
of a spec file.

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

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

[Bug 501353] Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

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=501353


Jochen Schmitt  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 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 501353] Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

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=501353


Jochen Schmitt  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de




--- Comment #2 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
13:55:34 EDT ---
OK, I will take a look on it, if the package is ok, 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 501353] Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

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=501353





--- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
13:59:00 EDT ---
At first, it will be nice, if you can upload the source rpm too.

Without the source rpm I can't start to review your packages.

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

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

[Bug 225988] Merge Review: libavc1394

[bugzilla]

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=225988





--- Comment #6 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-05-18 14:09:21 
EDT ---
Okay, can you build it in rawhide so I can do the review?

-- 
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 501353] Review Request: -

[bugzilla]

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=501353





--- Comment #4 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
14:12:20 EDT ---
At first some advices

* Please add a full qualified URL from which you can downloaded the upstream
tar ball in the Source tag
* GPL is not a valid abbrevious of the GPL license. Please keep in mind, that
there are several versions of the GPL. I detailed explaination you may find at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses
* Please remove the Packager tag
* You don't need to check for the buildroot before delete it on the beginning
of %clean and %install
* Please delete the brackets, if you fill out the predefined fields.

-- 
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 498073] Review Request: python-ekg - Community Health Reporter

[bugzilla]

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=498073





--- Comment #5 from Jeroen van Meeuwen   2009-05-18 
14:22:40 EDT ---
- the description is "too long": make it a little paragraph if you will

- mixed use of spaces and tabs in .spec

- the Source0 should be a complete URL

-- 
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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #9 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
14:28:43 EDT ---
Regarding of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros only
%{_initrdddir} is valid, which shows to %{_sysconfdir}/rc.d/init.d/

-- 
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 501006] Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for xine-lib

[bugzilla]

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=501006





--- Comment #21 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-05-18 14:30:37 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> Now closing.
> (Please fix GTK icon cache updating scriptlets, sorry)  

Whoops, the %post scriplet was missing. Fixed in the -11 release.

-- 
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 468227] Review Request: python-repoze-who - An identification and authentication framework for WSGI

[bugzilla]

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=468227


Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||tcall...@redhat.com
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tcall...@redhat.com
   Flag||fedora-review+




--- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway   2009-05-18 
14:30:18 EDT ---
Koji Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1361395

Review:

- rpmlint checks return nothing
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (BSD) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream (576a215d35d6bd8299cc887459273bc509913873)
- package compiles on devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file

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 494845] Review Request: xdrfile - A small C-library for reading and writing GROMACS trr and xtc files

[bugzilla]

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=494845





--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-05-18 14:35:03 
EDT ---
This should fix all problems.

http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/xdrfile.spec
http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/xdrfile-1.1b-1.fc10.src.rpm

rpmlint output:
xdrfile-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

This is not a problem since -devel requires the main package which includes the
documentation.

-- 
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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #10 from Robert Scheck   2009-05-18 
14:41:13 EDT ---
Well, /usr/lib/rpm/platform/i586-linux/macros from rpm-4.6+ shows following:

%_initddir  %{_sysconfdir}/rc.d/init.d
# Deprecated misspelling
%_initrddir %{_initddir}

-- 
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 489564] Review Request: Blueman - Bluetooth Manager

[bugzilla]

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=489564





--- Comment #41 from Lubomir Rintel   2009-05-18 14:41:36 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #39)
> I made a Spec that obsoletes bluetooth-applet, since that's the dual-icon
> showing up. 

Please do not obsolete anything in Fedora that's not really obsolete, you don't
replace it, don't conflict with it and haven't agreed with the maintainer.

The package seems fine in other respects and I'll approve it once you get
sponsored.

In order to sponsor you, I'd like to see a couple of informal reviews you've
done. That's usually done to demonstrate you're familiar with the guidelines
and RPM packaging.

-- 
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 225988] Merge Review: libavc1394

[bugzilla]

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=225988





--- Comment #7 from Jarod Wilson   2009-05-18 14:51:39 EDT 
---
Building now, http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1361505

-- 
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 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television

[bugzilla]

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=500926


Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #21 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-05-18 
14:50:16 EDT ---
Assigning. As far as I checked me-tv source code
there seems no legal concern.

-- 
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 453862] Review Request: globus-gsi-proxy-core - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Proxy Core Library

[bugzilla]

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=453862





--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System   
2009-05-18 14:52:14 EDT ---
globus-gsi-proxy-core-3.4-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/globus-gsi-proxy-core-3.4-1.fc11

-- 
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 501353] Review Request: ascii - Interactive ASCII name and synonym chart

[bugzilla]

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=501353


Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request:  -   |Review Request: ascii -
   |  |




-- 
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 467237] Review Request: globus-gssapi-gsi - Globus Toolkit - GSSAPI library

[bugzilla]

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=467237





--- Comment #20 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil   2009-05-18 
15:06:31 EDT ---
spot, 
It looks like the upstream is a little slow with responding. Can we come up
with a temporary resolution until they respond since there are many other
globus packages that depend on this one awaiting review?

If yes, what should the license tag be?

Or is this an absolute blocker?

-- 
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 225988] Merge Review: libavc1394

[bugzilla]

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=225988


Jussi Lehtola  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE
   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #8 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-05-18 15:15:15 
EDT ---
rpmlint output:
libavc1394-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

- This is OK, since -devel requires main package that includes documentation.


MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the 
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. OK
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. OK
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. OK
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. OK
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK


The package has been

APPROVED

-- 
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 501130] Review Request: drbdlinks - A program for managing links into a DRBD shared partition

[bugzilla]

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=501130





--- Comment #11 from Jochen Schmitt   2009-05-18 
15:15:41 EDT ---
That may be. If you want to change the packaging guildlines you may feell free
to open a discussion of the fedora-packaging list.

-- 
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 467237] Review Request: globus-gssapi-gsi - Globus Toolkit - GSSAPI library

[bugzilla]

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=467237


Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)|




--- Comment #21 from Tom "spot" Callaway   2009-05-18 
15:22:55 EDT ---
"ASL 2.0 and OpenSSL" is the correct license tag. I don't think this is a
blocker, even though upstream has incorrected added the ASL 2.0 terms to the
OpenSSL header files. We'll just use those files under the proper OpenSSL
licensing. 

Please follow up with upstream to get it corrected, but I'm lifting FE-Legal.

-- 
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 467237] Review Request: globus-gssapi-gsi - Globus Toolkit - GSSAPI library

[bugzilla]

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=467237





--- Comment #22 from Tom "spot" Callaway   2009-05-18 
15:23:25 EDT ---
incorrected should be "incorrectly". It's a Monday, sorry.

-- 
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 500713] Review Request: 389-ds-base - renamed from fedora-ds-base

[bugzilla]

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=500713





--- Comment #4 from Rich Megginson   2009-05-18 15:24:30 
EDT ---
Updated:
Spec URL: http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-ds-base.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-ds-base-1.2.1-1.src.rpm
Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-ds-base-1.2.1.tar.bz2
Other source files mentioned in spec are at
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview

sha1sum 389-ds-base-1.2.1.tar.bz2 
f2bd1d448cddb6bddfb5c62f97e898a97d253c5e  389-ds-base-1.2.1.tar.bz2
md5sum 389-ds-base-1.2.1.tar.bz2 
5c14449d2960ddba89efc48269ba6f3b  389-ds-base-1.2.1.tar.bz2

Builds in mock cleanly

> rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-10-i386/result/389-ds-base-1.2.1-1.fc10.src.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

> rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-10-i386/result/389-ds-base-1.2.1-1.fc10.i386.rpm 
389-ds-base.i386: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/dirsrv
389-ds-base.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.2.1-1 1.2.1-1.fc10
389-ds-base.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name dirsrv
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.

For the first warning - the directory server does its own log rotation, so no
need for logrotate.

For the second warning - I have no idea - there is no .fc10 in the Changelog
section

For the third warning - yes, this is intentional that the file is named
"dirsrv" and not the Fedora package name.

-- 
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 497525] Review Request: gnome-applet-bubblemon - Bubbling Load Monitoring Applet for the GNOME Panel

[bugzilla]

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=497525


Edwin ten Brink  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #13 from Edwin ten Brink   2009-05-18 
15:40:17 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: gnome-applet-bubblemon
Short Description: Bubbling Load Monitoring Applet for the GNOME Panel
Owners: edwintb
Branches: F-11
InitialCC:

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

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

[Bug 467237] Review Request: globus-gssapi-gsi - Globus Toolkit - GSSAPI library

[bugzilla]

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=467237


Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #23 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil   2009-05-18 
15:49:14 EDT ---
Okay then. Thanks spot! There are no other issues with this package.


This package (globus-gssapi-gsi) is APPROVED by oget


-- 
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 500506] Review Request: 389-adminutil - renamed from adminutil

[bugzilla]

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=500506





--- Comment #2 from Rich Megginson   2009-05-18 15:57:21 
EDT ---
Updated

Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2

md5sum 389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2 
e84240547e2f7b97d0576bcb85c06a57  389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2
sha1sum 389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2 
17581245a0d95b3f7cda90c3ed83b7984afe9b2c  389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2

I would like to waive or otherwise accept the rpmlint results.

This is the output I get from rpmlint - same results with both rpmlint 0.85 and
0.87 on Fedora 10

389-adminutil.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libadmsslutil.so.1.1.8
e...@glibc_2.0
389-adminutil.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libadminutil.so.1.1.8
e...@glibc_2.0

This is ok - these are functions specifically for handling fatal errors on
behalf of the calling application.

389-adminutil-devel.i386: W: no-documentation

The devel package has no documentation - it's all in the base package

rpmlint -v
/var/lib/mock/fedora-10-i386/result/389-adminutil-1.1.8-2.fc10.src.rpm 
389-adminutil.src: I: checking
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

I'm not sure where the other errors are coming from.  I do know that
libadminutil does not strictly need to link directly against ssl, nss,
ssldap60, or ldif60 - but all applications that want to support SSL (which is
all of them) will need to also link with libadmsslutil which does require the
SSL libs.  ldif60 is not strictly needed but it doesn't hurt to link with it.

The ICU dependencies are required to link with ICU even though rpmlint says
they are not needed.

-- 
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 468229] Review Request: python-wsgiref - WSGI (PEP 333) Reference Library

[bugzilla]

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=468229





--- Comment #3 from Luke Macken   2009-05-18 16:06:34 EDT 
---
Sorry, here it is:
http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-wsgiref-0.1.2-1.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 235679] Review Request: weechat - Portable, fast, light and extensible IRC client

[bugzilla]

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=235679


Ray Van Dolson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ra...@bludgeon.org
   Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #6 from Ray Van Dolson   2009-05-18 16:10:51 
EDT ---
Package Change Request
==
Package Name: weechat
New Branches: EL-4 EL-5
Owners: rayvd

-- 
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 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television

[bugzilla]

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=500926





--- Comment #22 from Zarko (grof)   2009-05-18 16:20:49 
EDT ---
Good, so I can expect review soon? :)

-- 
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 500746] Review Request: 389-admin - renamed from fedora-ds-admin

[bugzilla]

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=500746





--- Comment #4 from Rich Megginson   2009-05-18 16:19:24 
EDT ---
Updated

Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2
md5sum 389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2
81c41383af361e5591650edb38c3f3d8  389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2
sha1sum 389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2 
f1ac01ab09afb65d929f4552951240a1c246971d  389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2

SRPM URL: http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-admin-1.1.7-5.src.rpm

Other files mentioned in Source in the spec file are in
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview

389-admin.src: W: strange-permission 389-admin-git.sh 0775
- Fixed - see new SRPM above

389-admin.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%post chmod
- this is to work around a bug in rpm - if you mark a file/directory as
config(noreplace) rpm will preserve the file contents, but not the
ownership/permissions.

389-admin.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name dirsrv-admin
- this is intentional - we did not want the service name to be the same as the
package name because we knew we were going to change the package name

389-admin.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib64/libds-admin-serv.so.0.0.0 PR_vsnprintf
- How can I fix these?  Do they need to be fixed?  AFAICT fedora-ds-admin has
been running with this "problem" for years with no ill effects.

-- 
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 468229] Review Request: python-wsgiref - WSGI (PEP 333) Reference Library

[bugzilla]

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=468229





--- Comment #4 from Luke Macken   2009-05-18 16:24:53 EDT 
---
Fixed description

http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-wsgiref-0.1.2-2.fc10.src.rpm  
http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-wsgiref.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 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat application

[bugzilla]

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=497441





--- Comment #66 from Igor Jurišković   2009-05-18 
16:35:47 EDT ---
Done everything you said above. 

SPEC: http://78.46.84.75/fedora/mumble.spec
SRPM: http://78.46.84.75/fedora/mumble-1.1.8-12.fc10.src.rpm

Made an review here(older): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498413
and here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500476

-- 
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 501381] New: Review Request: 389-console - A Java based remote management console used for managing 389 Administration Server and 389 Directory Server

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: 389-console - A Java based remote management console 
used for managing 389 Administration Server and 389 Directory Server

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501381

   Summary: Review Request: 389-console - A Java based remote
management console used for managing 389
Administration Server and 389 Directory Server
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: rmegg...@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://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-console.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-console-1.1.3-2.src.rpm
Description: A Java based remote management console used for managing 389
Administration Server and 389 Directory Server.

This is a rename of fedora-idm-console to 389-console.

Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2
md5sum 389-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2 
bbf9b8e74b9746d65b1fd1871a665208  389-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2
sha1sum 389-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2 
f220b8d5b1b1a737f0744f2eef1e07ed8b5aa460  389-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2

Compiles cleanly in mock
rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-10-i386/result/*.rpm
389-console.i386: E: no-binary
- the only reason this is not a noarch package is because of the dependency on
jss which has a specific arch
389-console-debuginfo.i386: E: empty-debuginfo-package
- this is a java package

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

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

[Bug 500476] Review Request: cups-bjnp- cups backend for Canon bjnp (USB over IP) printers

[bugzilla]

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=500476


Igor Jurišković  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||juriskovic.i...@gmail.com




--- Comment #3 from Igor Jurišković   2009-05-18 
16:17:52 EDT ---
Hello Louis.

This is not official review. I'm looking for a sponsor like you.

- remove Vendor tag. Its not needed.



- Consider using parallel make if possible. If not write in comment above make
why not. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Parallel_make



- install doesn't preserve timestamps. Add INSTALL="install -p" like:
make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p" install
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package#.25install_section



- update package to new version.



- I'm unable to download source but are you sure that License is only GPL? If
possible be more specific like GPLv3+...



- %doc part can go into one line. Its easier to read but its your choice.



- you need to make space between changelogs:

* Thu Mar 12 2009 Louis Lagendijk 
- something

* Thu Feb 19 2009 Louis Lagendijk 
- something

* ...


- you're missing "-" at the beginning of some changes.



- changelog part is missing version and release number:

* Thu Mar 12 2009 Louis Lagendijk 
-


-- 
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 501381] Review Request: 389-console - A Java based remote management console used for managing 389 Administration Server and 389 Directory Server

[bugzilla]

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=501381


Rich Megginson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||shai...@redhat.com
  Alias||389-console




-- 
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 501383] Review Request: 389-ds-console - 389 Directory Server Management Console

[bugzilla]

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=501383


Rich Megginson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||shai...@redhat.com
  Alias||389-ds-console




-- 
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 501383] New: Review Request: 389-ds-console - 389 Directory Server Management Console

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: 389-ds-console - 389 Directory Server Management 
Console

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501383

   Summary: Review Request: 389-ds-console - 389 Directory Server
Management Console
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: rmegg...@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://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-ds-console.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-ds-console-1.2.0-2.src.rpm
Description: A Java based remote management console used for managing 389
Directory Server.  The 389 Console is required to load and
run these jar files.

This is a rename of fedora-ds-console to 389-ds-console.

Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-ds-console-1.2.0.tar.bz2
md5sum 389-ds-console-1.2.0.tar.bz2 
90bd0d779719ef7d4cd57de3054b8721  389-ds-console-1.2.0.tar.bz2
sha1sum 389-ds-console-1.2.0.tar.bz2 
88766feff50b7c66b2b6e53223fd60a3df0c3f62  389-ds-console-1.2.0.tar.bz2

Compiles cleanly in mock

rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-10-i386/result/*.rpm
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

-- 
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 468229] Review Request: python-wsgiref - WSGI (PEP 333) Reference Library

[bugzilla]

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=468229


Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tcall...@redhat.com




--- Comment #5 from Tom "spot" Callaway   2009-05-18 
17:01:30 EDT ---
License tag should be:

Python or ZPLv2.1

-- 
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 501385] New: Review Request: 389-admin-console - 389 Admin Server Management Console

[bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: 389-admin-console - 389 Admin Server Management Console

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501385

   Summary: Review Request: 389-admin-console - 389 Admin Server
Management Console
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: rmegg...@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://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-admin-console.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-admin-console-1.1.3-2.src.rpm
Description: A Java based remote management console used for managing 389
Admin Server.  The 389 Console is required to load and
run these jar files.

This is a rename of fedora-ds-admin-console to 389-admin-console.

Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-admin-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2
md5sum 389-admin-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2 
68a27a56334d4ab44b3b44a81f84d8a8  389-admin-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2
sha1sum 389-admin-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2 
aa1d81fd2a8e2d70dfb2aa6e3df3f11e3cef29e7  389-admin-console-1.1.3.tar.bz2
Compiles cleanly in mock

rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-10-i386/result/*.rpm
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

-- 
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 467237] Review Request: globus-gssapi-gsi - Globus Toolkit - GSSAPI library

[bugzilla]

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=467237


Mattias Ellert  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #24 from Mattias Ellert   2009-05-18 
17:02:38 EDT ---
Thank you for the review. I will follow what upstream will do about the issue.


New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: globus-gssapi-gsi
Short Description: Globus Toolkit - GSSAPI library
Owners: ellert
Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 EL-4 EL-5
InitialCC:

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

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

[Bug 500476] Review Request: cups-bjnp- cups backend for Canon bjnp (USB over IP) printers

[bugzilla]

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=500476





--- Comment #4 from Louis Lagendijk   2009-05-18 
17:11:06 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Hello Louis.
> 
> This is not official review. I'm looking for a sponsor like you.
> 
> - remove Vendor tag. Its not needed.
> 
> 
good catch, a left over from the Sourceforge release

> 
> - Consider using parallel make if possible. If not write in comment above make
> why not. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Parallel_make
> 
> 
done

> 
> - install doesn't preserve timestamps. Add INSTALL="install -p" like:
> make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p" install
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package#.25install_section
> 
> 
done
> 
> - update package to new version.
> 
> 
Not sure what you mean here. Anyhow, the versions available now are based on
the version I released on sourceforge Sat May 16
> 
> - I'm unable to download source but are you sure that License is only GPL? If
> possible be more specific like GPLv3+...
> 
> 
See license included. It is actually the Cups license, which is GPLv2.
Corrected.

> 
> - %doc part can go into one line. Its easier to read but its your choice.
> 
> 
Done
> 
> - you need to make space between changelogs:
> 
> * Thu Mar 12 2009 Louis Lagendijk 
> - something
> 
> * Thu Feb 19 2009 Louis Lagendijk 
> - something
> 
> * ...
> 
Done
> 
> - you're missing "-" at the beginning of some changes.
> 
> 
Done
> 
> - changelog part is missing version and release number:
> 
> * Thu Mar 12 2009 Louis Lagendijk 
> -
>   
Done

I found a few more issues when I ran rpmlint on the srp. These are corrected as
well.

New versions available:
Spec URL: http://www.fazant.net/cups-bjnp/cups-bjnp.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.fazant.net/cups-bjnp/cups-bjnp-0.5.3-2.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