[Bug 517021] Review Request: perl-DBIx-Simple - Easy-to-use OO interface to DBI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517021 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 02:21:35 EDT --- So what now? I set fedora-review flag to ? Should I fix something else? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516869] Review Request: perl-Search-Xapian - Xapian perl bindings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516869
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 02:34:21
EDT ---
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i686).
koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1604641
- rpmlint is NOT silent for RPM.
perl-Search-Xapian.i686: E: explicit-lib-dependency xapian-core-libs
You must let rpm find the library dependencies by itself. Do not put unneeded
explicit Requires: tags.
== Ok
perl-Search-Xapian.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0.11-4
['1.0.11.0-4.fc12', '1.0.11.0-4']
The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not
coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package.
== Fix this
+ source files match upstream url
480fd99617975c1aaf9127cd7c7166bc05d07eb1 Search-Xapian-1.0.11.0.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc is present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no scriptlets present.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ make test gave
All tests successful.
Files=15, Tests=445, 2 wallclock secs ( 0.11 usr 0.01 sys + 0.68 cusr 0.11
csys = 0.91 CPU)
+ Package perl-Search-Xapian-1.0.11.0-4.fc12.i686 =
Provides: Xapian.so perl(Search::Xapian) = 1.0.11.0
perl(Search::Xapian::BM25Weight) perl(Search::Xapian::BoolWeight)
perl(Search::Xapian::Database) perl(Search::Xapian::Document)
perl(Search::Xapian::ESet) perl(Search::Xapian::ESetIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::Enquire) perl(Search::Xapian::MSet)
perl(Search::Xapian::MSet::Tied) perl(Search::Xapian::MSetIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::MultiValueSorter) perl(Search::Xapian::PerlStopper)
perl(Search::Xapian::PositionIterator) perl(Search::Xapian::PostingIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::Query) perl(Search::Xapian::QueryParser)
perl(Search::Xapian::RSet) perl(Search::Xapian::SimpleStopper)
perl(Search::Xapian::Stem) perl(Search::Xapian::Stopper)
perl(Search::Xapian::TermGenerator) perl(Search::Xapian::TermIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::TradWeight) perl(Search::Xapian::ValueIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::Weight) perl(Search::Xapian::WritableDatabase)
Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)
libm.so.6 libstdc++.so.6 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)
libxapian.so.15 perl = 0:5.006 perl(Carp) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Exporter)
perl(Search::Xapian::BM25Weight) perl(Search::Xapian::BoolWeight)
perl(Search::Xapian::Database) perl(Search::Xapian::Document)
perl(Search::Xapian::ESet) perl(Search::Xapian::ESetIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::Enquire) perl(Search::Xapian::MSet)
perl(Search::Xapian::MSet::Tied) perl(Search::Xapian::MSetIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::MultiValueSorter) perl(Search::Xapian::PerlStopper)
perl(Search::Xapian::PositionIterator) perl(Search::Xapian::PostingIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::Query) perl(Search::Xapian::QueryParser)
perl(Search::Xapian::RSet) perl(Search::Xapian::SimpleStopper)
perl(Search::Xapian::Stem) perl(Search::Xapian::Stopper)
perl(Search::Xapian::TermGenerator) perl(Search::Xapian::TermIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::TradWeight) perl(Search::Xapian::ValueIterator)
perl(Search::Xapian::Weight) perl(Search::Xapian::WritableDatabase)
perl(Tie::Array) perl(UNIVERSAL) perl(overload) perl(strict) perl(warnings)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
+ Not a GUI application
Suggestions:
1) you can write %files as
%doc Changes README
%{perl_vendorlib}/*
%{_mandir}/man3/*
2) Fix Changelog entry versions in SPEC
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 516535] Review Request: globus-gram-job-manager-scripts - Globus Toolkit - GRAM Job ManagerScripts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516535 --- Comment #3 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se 2009-08-14 02:38:57 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Wny don't install documentation directly to default RPM location? There is no easy way to do that. It is not --docdir that is wrong w.r.t. the RPM location, it is the name of the subdirectory inside --docdir. There is no configure switch for that. All globus packages in Fedora do it this way. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 514833] Review Request: sphinx - Free open-source SQL full-text search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514833 Andrew Colin Kissa and...@topdog.za.net 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 514833] Review Request: sphinx - Free open-source SQL full-text search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514833 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Colin Kissa and...@topdog.za.net 2009-08-14 02:41:31 EDT --- Allisson, The final issue is not a blocker, just a good to have. The API's would be better installed in usable state (Java compiled, python in the correct directory, etc) Am sure you can do that before CVS if you want. Otherwise all looks fine now. --- This package (sphinx) is APPROVED by topdog --- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507106] Review Request: msp430-libc - C library for use with GCC on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507106 Steve Whitehouse swhit...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||swhit...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|swhit...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Steve Whitehouse swhit...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 03:53:53 EDT --- I'll try and review this today - sorry for the delay. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517462] New: Review Request: voicedata-zh_TW-gcin-EdwardLiu - Chinese voice data from gcin project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: voicedata-zh_TW-gcin-EdwardLiu - Chinese voice data
from gcin project
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517462
Summary: Review Request: voicedata-zh_TW-gcin-EdwardLiu -
Chinese voice data from gcin project
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: dc...@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://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/voicedata-zh_TW-gcin-EdwardLiu.spec
SRPM URL:
http://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/voicedata-zh_TW-gcin-EdwardLiu-20090221-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description: This voice data records voice of Edward Der-Hua Liu, the gcin's
author, for enabling speak-as-you-type functionality of gcin.
Although this package is from gcin and for gcin mainly, I intend to extend its
usage so other package can also use it. Thus this package does not depend on
gcin.
This package is actually a piece of whole voice data collection, so it does not
own %{datadir}/voicedata/zh_TW/gcin at the moment.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488968] Review Request: fedora-app-install - Fedora application data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488968 Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rhug...@redhat.com --- Comment #25 from Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 04:14:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #23) We're talking about 80-150MB in roughly 2000 files, iirc. The mirrors can soak that up. And having an index file you grab from the repodata is just like things we already have. So, the user launches add/remove software, and searches for office. 1. The desktop metadata gets downloaded (few Mb) 2. The results get shown with icon-missing (14) 3. PackageKit instructs yum to download icon data for 14 packages 4. The icons get downloaded by yum 5. Add / remove software updates the icons with the new themed icons Now, compare that to the Ubuntu add/remove experience: 1. The results are shown with the correct icons, near instantly Now we need the desktop metadata in one file so we can perform searching on the file (like searching for 'office' in Hungarian) and because we want to get results instantaneously. I would argue we need the icons included in the metadata file as we want to show the icons with the search results as they appear. The fact that Suse and Ubuntu want to share a common spec on this really makes integrating it so deeply with the Fedora repo metadata and yum core a bitter pill to swallow. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517466] New: Review Request: lbreakout2 - A breakout-style arcade game for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lbreakout2 - A breakout-style arcade game for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517466 Summary: Review Request: lbreakout2 - A breakout-style arcade game for Linux Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: stjepan.g...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.zemris.fer.hr/~sgros/stuff/fedora/lbreakout2/lbreakout2.spec SRPM URL: http://www.zemris.fer.hr/~sgros/stuff/fedora/lbreakout2/lbreakout2-2.6-0.1.beta7.fc11.src.rpm Description: A breakout-style arcade game for Linux. I guess all of you know how to play breakout basically. Ball bounces around -- paddle keeps ball in game - all bricks destroyed -- next level ;-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 517466] Review Request: lbreakout2 - A breakout-style arcade game for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517466
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
--- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-08-14 04:38:54
EDT ---
A few notes:
- The description is nonsense. Use e.g.
The successor to LBreakout offers you a new challenge in more than 50 levels
with loads of new bonuses (goldshower, joker, explosive balls, bonus magnet
...), maluses (chaos, darkness, weak balls, malus magnet ...) and special
bricks (growing bricks, explosive bricks, regenerative bricks ...). If you are
still hungry for more after that you can create your own levelsets with the
integrated level editor.
- The comments to your patches are missing. Add them. Send the patches
upstream.
- Add INSTALL=install -p to make install to preserve time stamps. Use
'cp -p' instead of 'cp' for the same reason.
- Don't mix %{name} and lbreakout2 in %files - use one or the other and stick
with it.
- Remove the docdir created by install; just list the necessary files as %doc.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507106] Review Request: msp430-libc - C library for use with GCC on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507106 --- Comment #6 from Steve Whitehouse swhit...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 05:17:17 EDT --- rpmlint output: [st...@quoit ~]$ rpmlint ./msp430-libc.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [st...@quoit ~]$ rpmlint ./msp430-libc-0-3.20090726cvs.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Package name: OK Spec file name: OK Packaging Guidelines: Licensing Guidelines: OK License matches spec file: OK License not in upstream source: OK (but should request that upstream adds it) Spec file in US English: OK Spec file legible: OK Sources match upstream: OK Must build on one arch: OK BuildRequires: OK Locales: N/A Dynamic Lib: N/A Owns all created directories: OK Files only listed once: OK File permissions: OK Consistent Macro use: OK Contains code and permissible content: OK Large doc files: OK (there are none) Nothing in %doc is runtime: OK Header files must be in a -devel package: Static libraries must be in a -static package: - I assume these two only apply if the package is targetted at the installed platform and that this doesn't apply to cross-libraries tools. It makes no sense to separate the headers from the library since both are always required to make use of this package. It makes no sense to name the library -static when msp430 only supports static libraries anyway. pkgconfig: OK (No .pc files included) Library files with .so suffix: OK (None included) Must not contain .la files: OK (None included) GUI Applications: N/A Must not own files/directories owned by other packages: OK Install removes build root: OK Filenames are UTF-8: OK ... and now for the SHOULD items... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507106] Review Request: msp430-libc - C library for use with GCC on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507106 --- Comment #7 from Steve Whitehouse swhit...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 05:29:32 EDT --- Package review SHOULD items: License in upstream source: As above, that should be requested to be added Translations of description summary: No translations available - can we get those via Transifex I wonder? Not sure how we can arrange that for the spec file itself. Mock build: Robert, have you already tried that? If so I'll take your word for it that it works. Package functions: It is impossible to test all package functions without a huge test suite. I can see that the code looks sane and the only reason for non-functioning would be a broken compiler which is not an issue relating to this particular package. I have used certain functions from this library before and they have worked as expected. Scriptlets: N/A Subpackages: N/A .pc files: N/A File deps outside of certain directories: N/A So I think we are most of the way there with this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510943] Review Request: ipplan - Web-based IP address manager and tracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510943 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Colin Kissa and...@topdog.za.net 2009-08-14 06:27:37 EDT --- Updated to upstream version 4.92 http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/ipplan/ipplan.spec http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/ipplan/ipplan-4.92-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #16 from Patrick Monnerat p...@datasphere.ch 2009-08-14 06:35:01 EDT --- Thank you Spot for your advice. New version: http://monnerat.fedorapeople.org/WebCalendar-1.2.0-7.fc10.src.rpm * Fri Aug 14 2009 Patrick Monnerat p...@datasphere.ch 1.2.0-7 - Patch and tarball newmenuicons to replace menu icons that have an unclear license. - Upstream patch references added. rpmlint output: WebCalendar.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/WebCalendar/includes/classes/phpmailer/class.smtp.php /usr/share/php/PHPMailer/class.smtp.php WebCalendar.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/WebCalendar/settings.php 0660 WebCalendar.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/WebCalendar/includes/classes/hKit/hkit.class.php /usr/share/php/hkit/hkit.class.php WebCalendar.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/WebCalendar 0775 WebCalendar.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/WebCalendar/includes/classes/phpmailer/class.phpmailer.php /usr/share/php/PHPMailer/class.phpmailer.php 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings. Same explanations as for 1.2.0-5 Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1604916 Since all problematic icons have been removed and replaced, we can probably lift FE_LEGAL. David, I let you do it if you agree. php-PHPMailer package has been approved, so we still have 2 blocking pending review requests: _ php_captchaphp (review request 505354) _ JSCookMenu (review request 505360) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 506825] Review Request: bickley - A meta data management API and framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506825 --- Comment #11 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 06:34:01 EDT --- - License is unclear. Spec: GPLv2+, COPYING is GPLv2 but the headers of the sources are LGPLv2. This looks like a mistake to me. Please ask upstream for clarification. Got clarification from the developer that the license is LGPL2+. Email on the list is here http://lists.moblin.org/pipermail/dev/2009-August/005801.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507110] Review Request: openal-soft - OpenAL-Soft lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507110 --- Comment #26 from Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de 2009-08-14 07:02:12 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: openal-soft New Branches: F-10, F-11 Owners: linuxdonald -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507110] Review Request: openal-soft - OpenAL-Soft lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507110 Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | Flag|fedora-cvs+ |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 485638] Review Request: dmenu - Dynamic X menu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485638 --- Comment #15 from Rahul Sundaram sunda...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 07:17:41 EDT --- Right but then I would suggest that you keep them only in the EL branches and remove unnecessary cruft from the Fedora branches but that's left to the maintainer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517488] New: Review Request: vhostmd - Virtualization host metrics daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: vhostmd - Virtualization host metrics daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517488 Summary: Review Request: vhostmd - Virtualization host metrics daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rjo...@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://www.annexia.org/tmp/vhostmd.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/vhostmd-0.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: vhostmd provides a metrics communication channel between a host and its hosted virtual machines, allowing limited introspection of host resource usage from within virtual machines. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1604955 rpmlint output: vhostmd.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/vhostmd/vhostmd.dtd vhostmd.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/vhostmd/metric.dtd (Probably the upstream package shouldn't be placing the DTD files in that location. In any case I don't think those files should be edited by the user). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485638] Review Request: dmenu - Dynamic X menu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485638 Rahul Sundaram sunda...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|sunda...@redhat.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #16 from Rahul Sundaram sunda...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 07:20:39 EDT --- Didn't realize this one requires a sponsor. Taking myself off as the reviewer although I can review it unofficially and make it easy for the sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517497] New: Review Request: perl-Nagios-Plugin - Family of perl modules to streamline writing Nagios plugins
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-Nagios-Plugin - Family of perl modules to streamline writing Nagios plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517497 Summary: Review Request: perl-Nagios-Plugin - Family of perl modules to streamline writing Nagios plugins Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ru...@rubenkerkhof.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/perl-Nagios-Plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/perl-Nagios-Plugin-0.33-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Nagios::Plugin and its associated Nagios::Plugin::* modules are a family of perl modules to streamline writing Nagios plugins. The main end user modules are Nagios::Plugin, providing an object-oriented interface to the entire Nagios::Plugin::* collection, and Nagios::Plugin::Functions, providing a simpler functional interface to a useful subset of the available functionality. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485638] Review Request: dmenu - Dynamic X menu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485638 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #17 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-08-14 08:02:49 EDT --- I don't agree. I think keeping the BuildRoot stuff doesn't hurt anything: it's just a few lines, and it avoids using conditionals that are a lot easier to get wrong. Having one and only spec file for the different branches is a plus, also. ** - The %description line fits on two lines. No need to use four. - Any reason why you are not using SMP make? If it doesn't work, please document it. - Your patch doesn't have a comment. Add one explaining what it does and why it is necessary. - I think you are missing a Requires: on the package that provides the font dmenu uses. ** I am a sponsor, so I can sponsor you if necessary. You just need to do a few informal reviews first. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517497] Review Request: perl-Nagios-Plugin - Family of perl modules to streamline writing Nagios plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517497 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #1 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de 2009-08-14 08:12:38 EDT --- Package doesn't build: ... ERROR: Bad build req: No Package Found for perl(Math::Calc::Units). ... These 2 requires probaly are unneccessary: ... Requires: perl(Class::Accessor) Requires: perl(Config::Tiny) ... However, as this package currently doesn't build, it's hard to verify if they really are required. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481030] Review Request: pmd-emacs - an interface to PMD for (X)Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481030
Joshua Rosen bjro...@polybus.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bjro...@polybus.com
--- Comment #2 from Joshua Rosen bjro...@polybus.com 2009-08-14 08:18:28 EDT
---
This is an informal review, I'm new to the packaging process.
Everything looks good to me. There are no rpmlint errors, the md5sums match, I
was able to build it.
# MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.[1] 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}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] . OK
# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines . OK
# MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines . OK
# MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. [3] OK
# MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] OK
# MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] OK
# MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source OK
# MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. OK
# MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, NA
# MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
# MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. NA
# MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths NA
# MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, NA
# MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. OK
# MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. OK
# MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, OK
# MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). OK
# MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. OK
# MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. OK
# MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. NA
# MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. OK
# MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. NA
# MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. NA
# MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability). OK
# MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) 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: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release} OK
# MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.OK
# MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. NA
# MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. OK
# MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). OK
# MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8 OK
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517507] New: Package Review: perl-Locale-Msgfmt - Compile .po files to .mo files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: perl-Locale-Msgfmt - Compile .po files to .mo files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517507 Summary: Package Review: perl-Locale-Msgfmt - Compile .po files to .mo files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmasl...@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://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Locale-Msgfmt.spec SRPM URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Locale-Msgfmt-0.14-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: This module does the same thing as msgfmt from GNU gettext-tools,. except this is pure Perl. The interface is best explained through examples on home page. Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605020 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517507] Package Review: perl-Locale-Msgfmt - Compile .po files to .mo files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517507 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517511] New: Package Review: perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags - Efficiently parse exuberant ctags files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags - Efficiently parse exuberant ctags files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517511 Summary: Package Review: perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags - Efficiently parse exuberant ctags files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmasl...@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://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags.spec SRPM URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags-1.01-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: This Perl module parses ctags files and handles both traditional ctags as well as extended ctags files such as produced with Exuberant ctags. To the best of my knowledge, it does not handle emacs-style etags files. Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605052 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517507] Package Review: perl-Locale-Msgfmt - Compile .po files to .mo files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517507 --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 08:53:31 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i686). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605020 + rpmlint is silent for RPM and SRPM. + source files match upstream url 767b2328e323eb06d0a9a5163b451d38748447ec Locale-Msgfmt-0.14.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=5, Tests=16, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.05 usr 0.00 sys + 0.40 cusr 0.03 csys = 0.48 CPU) + Package perl-Locale-Msgfmt-0.14-1.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(Locale::Msgfmt) = 0.14 perl(Locale::Msgfmt::Utils) = 0.14 perl(Locale::Msgfmt::mo) = 0.14 perl(Locale::Msgfmt::po) = 0.14 perl(Module::Install::Msgfmt) = 0.14 Requires: /usr/bin/perl perl(File::Path) perl(File::Spec) perl(Getopt::Long) perl(Locale::Msgfmt) = 0.14 perl(Locale::Msgfmt::Utils) perl(Locale::Msgfmt::mo) perl(Locale::Msgfmt::po) perl(Module::Install::Base) perl(Module::Install::Share) perl(base) perl(strict) perl(warnings) 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 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #17 from David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 2009-08-14 08:59:30 EDT --- I'll defer to spot for lifting FE-Legal. That said I'll try an do the balance of the review work this weekend and get all of the pending reviews for this package knocked out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 515136] Review Request: gettext-commons - Java internationalization (i18n) library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515136 Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #357233|application/octet-stream|text/plain mime type|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508922] Review Request: scselinux - GUI Code for system-config-selinux, polgen, and lockdown
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508922 --- Comment #5 from Christopher Pardy cpa...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 09:02:27 EDT --- If someone could please take a look at this, as today is my last day as an intern here and it would be nice to be able to give some sort of status on this thing. Also actually fixed the SRPM to point to an srpm. Spec URL: http://www.fedorahosted.org/releases/s/y/system-config-selinux/system-config-selinux.spec SRPM URL: system-config-selinux-0.2-2.fc11.src.rpm Description: system-config-selinux provides the graphical tools system-config-selinux and selinux-polgen for managing SELinux systems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 515136] Review Request: gettext-commons - Java internationalization (i18n) library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515136 --- Comment #3 from Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 09:06:44 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.webalice.it/musuruan/RPMS/reviews/gettext-commons.spec SRPM URL: http://www.webalice.it/musuruan/RPMS/reviews/gettext-commons-0.9.6-3.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: - Fixed javadoc generation -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517517] New: Package Review: perl-PPIx-EditorTools - Utility methods and base class for manipulating Perl via PPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: perl-PPIx-EditorTools - Utility methods and base class for manipulating Perl via PPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517517 Summary: Package Review: perl-PPIx-EditorTools - Utility methods and base class for manipulating Perl via PPI Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmasl...@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://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-PPIx-EditorTools.spec SRPM URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-PPIx-EditorTools-0.07-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Base class and utility methods for manipulating Perl via PPI. Pulled out from the Padre::Task::PPI code. Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605092 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517507] Package Review: perl-Locale-Msgfmt - Compile .po files to .mo files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517507 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 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 517520] New: Review Request: easymock - Easy mock objects
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: easymock - Easy mock objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517520 Summary: Review Request: easymock - Easy mock objects Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: akurt...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/easymock.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/easymock-2.5-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: EasyMock provides Mock Objects for interfaces in JUnit tests by generating them on the fly using Java's proxy mechanism. Due to EasyMock's unique style of recording expectations, most refactorings will not affect the Mock Objects. So EasyMock is a perfect fit for Test-Driven Development. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517497] Review Request: perl-Nagios-Plugin - Family of perl modules to streamline writing Nagios plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517497 --- Comment #2 from Ruben Kerkhof ru...@rubenkerkhof.com 2009-08-14 09:08:33 EDT --- Hi Ralf, Hmm, I might have been bitten by the freeze, perl-Math-Calc-Units for f-11 is in updates-testing now but hasn't been pushed to rawhide yet. Those 2 Requires: Requires: perl(Class::Accessor) Requires: perl(Config::Tiny) are necessary, they're not automatically picked up by rpm and the package doesn't work without them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517511] Package Review: perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags - Efficiently parse exuberant ctags files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517511 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 514833] Review Request: sphinx - Free open-source SQL full-text search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514833 Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 09:21:15 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sphinx Short Description: Free open-source SQL full-text search engine Owners: allisson Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517517] Package Review: perl-PPIx-EditorTools - Utility methods and base class for manipulating Perl via PPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517517 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 09:24:31 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i686). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605092 - rpmlint output for RPM and SRPM. perl-PPIx-EditorTools.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 14) == can be fixed using sed -i -e 's|\t| |g' perl-PPIx-EditorTools.spec + source files match upstream url f9c74ff5642577e5369bac6375ffa06fa51998ba PPIx-EditorTools-0.07.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=7, Tests=33, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr 0.01 sys + 0.89 cusr 0.09 csys = 1.03 CPU) + Package perl-PPIx-EditorTools-0.07-1.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(PPIx::EditorTools) = 0.07 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::FindUnmatchedBrace) = 0.07 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::FindVariableDeclaration) = 0.07 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::IntroduceTemporaryVariable) = 0.07 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::RenamePackage) = 0.07 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::RenamePackageFromPath) = 0.07 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::RenameVariable) = 0.07 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::ReturnObject) = 0.07 Requires: perl = 0:5.008 perl(Carp) perl(Class::XSAccessor) perl(Class::XSAccessor) = 1.02 perl(File::Basename) perl(File::Spec) perl(PPI) perl(PPI) = 1.203 perl(PPIx::EditorTools::RenamePackage) perl(PPIx::EditorTools::ReturnObject) perl(base) perl(strict) perl(warnings) 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 517511] Package Review: perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags - Efficiently parse exuberant ctags files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517511 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 09:30:11 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i686). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605052 + rpmlint is silent for RPM and SRPM. + source files match upstream url 79bd974d151cc6923b38cece4f563bc09cb9eb19 Parse-ExuberantCTags-1.01.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=21, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.04 cusr 0.00 csys = 0.07 CPU) + Package perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags-1.01-1.fc12.i686= Provides: ExuberantCTags.so perl(Parse::ExuberantCTags) = 1.01 Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) perl = 0:5.006001 perl(XSLoader) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rtld(GNU_HASH) 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 516698] Review Request: fpaste - A simple tool for pasting info onto fpaste.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516698 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 09:52:15 EDT --- oops.. my bad. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #18 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 11:16:37 EDT --- I think you're going to need to make a new custom tarball that doesn't have the icons, since it is not clear that we even have the permission to redistribute them in the tarball (and in the SRPM). Sorry for not making that clear originally. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 --- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-08-14 11:27:43 EDT --- Well, so (In reply to comment #10) * Currently rsakeys.ini is recreated every time xrdp is upgraded. Is this correct? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507110] Review Request: openal-soft - OpenAL-Soft lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507110 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 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 507110] Review Request: openal-soft - OpenAL-Soft lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507110 --- Comment #27 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-08-14 11:26:18 EDT --- It is not needed to reopen this bug with CVS change request. By the way would you explain why you want to import this package also on F-10/11? It will cause all packages depending on openal to be rebuilt due to soversion change, which should not happen in general on stable branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507631] Review Request: rubygem-rubyzip - Ruby module for reading and writing zip files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507631 --- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-08-14 11:38:16 EDT --- I will close this bug as NOTABUG if no response from the reporter is received within ONE WEEK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 515832] Review Request: libtelnet - TELNET protocol handling library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515832 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(s...@middleditch. ||us) --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-08-14 11:35:24 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 517410] Review Request: django-piston - A mini-framework for Django for creating RESTful APIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517410 Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 11:40:00 EDT --- Well, Good: + rpmlint silent + koji build OK http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605267 + package meets naming guidelines + package meets packaging guidelines + spec file legible, in am. english + source matches upstream + license (BSD) OK + 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 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 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 --- Comment #13 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-08-14 11:47:51 EDT --- yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517410] Review Request: django-piston - A mini-framework for Django for creating RESTful APIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517410 Diego Búrigo Zacarão dieg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Diego Búrigo Zacarão dieg...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 11:51:54 EDT --- Thanks, Allisson. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: django-piston Short Description: A mini-framework for Django for creating RESTful APIs Owners: diegobz Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488968] Review Request: fedora-app-install - Fedora application data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488968 --- Comment #26 from Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 11:57:10 EDT --- There is a terrible answer here, which is that you make users of PackageKit swallow a scheduled job that keeps all metadata fresh. Every few hours it just pulls down every single bit of metadata out there (think apt-get --update). That way whenever you go to use PackageKit, 9 times out of 10 you have the latest metadata and there is no need to go download anything new. And if there is a repo that is out of date (and we already have ways of discovering this very quickly/easily) the amount of new stuff to download will be quite small as compared to downloading for every repo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488968] Review Request: fedora-app-install - Fedora application data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488968 --- Comment #27 from seth vidal svi...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 11:58:07 EDT --- Putting a package in the distro that will be a giant bag of icons and translations that will need to updated whenever a pkg changes or gets added that adds/removes/changes that set is a bitter pill to swallow, too. It's the WRONG way to do things, furthermore and unlike Suse and Ubuntu we have evidence of it being a bad idea in the form of two pkgs: comps and specspo - both of which used to be packages trundled along in fedora/rhl/rhel. I was talking to James about this problem and generating the metadata at createrepo time isn't terribly difficult. And the users benefit b/c instead of downloading a package containing all this content each time it is updated they can just download the fedora-updates metadata for this content. Making this information be per-repo means that 3rd party and private repos can take advantage of it, too. So, you want this metadata available to yum and PK, great, we can do that - but the info must live in the repository metadata - not in some random pkg in the distro. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 513848] Review Request: fbzx - A ZX Spectrum emulator for FrameBuffer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=513848 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:00:12 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517412] Review Request: django-profile - Django pluggable user profile zone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517412 Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 12:03:54 EDT --- Well, BAD: * rpmlint issues: django-profile.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.6-0.1.20090813svn420 ['0.6-0.1.20090813svnr420.fc11', '0.6-0.1.20090813svnr420'] django-profile.noarch: W: no-documentation django-profile.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/demo/manage.py 0644 /usr/bin/env 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. Please fix this issues. * no %doc files: Please add CHANGELOG.txt, LICENSE.txt, README.txt and TODO.txt in %doc section. * License mismatch: setup.py informs a MIT license, but, LICENSE.txt is a BSD license template, see those templates: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517466] Review Request: lbreakout2 - A breakout-style arcade game for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517466 Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com 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 512506] Review Request: php-ezc-Feed - eZ Components Feed
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=512506 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:14:11 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504424] Review Request: rubygem-json - A JSON implementation in Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504424 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #14 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:14:45 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 512505] Review Request: php-ezc-AuthenticationDatabaseTiein - eZ Components AuthenticationDatabaseTiein
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=512505 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:13:24 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517300] Rename Request: ccss - A simple api for CSS Stylesheets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517300 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:15:20 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 514342] Review Request: rubygem-fattr - Fatter attribute for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514342 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:18:06 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #19 from Patrick Monnerat p...@datasphere.ch 2009-08-14 12:16:44 EDT --- Thanks for the precision, Spot. I'll do it very soon. But I wonder how to name and/or version the package, since this case is not listed in the package naming guidelines, and the packaged tarball will not match upstream's. I can imagine commenting the spec file like in the CVS snapshot case, but it is nether a prerelease, nor a postrelease (in fact, it is a custom release)... Can you help me on this topic ? Thank you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517520] Review Request: easymock - Easy mock objects
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517520
Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||overh...@redhat.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|overh...@redhat.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 12:17:10
EDT ---
Thanks for the submission. Everything looks pretty good. See comments below.
- it would be nice to use %{buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT but it's not
a blocker
- my generated source tarball has a different md5sum but the contents are the
same (likely timestamp differences)
- will we build with maven once it's updated?
- other than the non-conffile-in-etc for the maven pom, everything is rpmlint
clean
- what provides %add_to_maven_depmap? I don't see it doing much in my log. Do
we need a BR on maven?
- please provide a link to the origin of the OSGi manifest
It builds fine locally for me.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517466] Review Request: lbreakout2 - A breakout-style arcade game for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517466
--- Comment #2 from Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 12:16:39
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
- The description is nonsense. Use e.g.
The successor to LBreakout offers you a new challenge in more than 50 levels
with loads of new bonuses (goldshower, joker, explosive balls, bonus magnet
...), maluses (chaos, darkness, weak balls, malus magnet ...) and special
bricks (growing bricks, explosive bricks, regenerative bricks ...). If you are
still hungry for more after that you can create your own levelsets with the
integrated level editor.
Fixed.
- The comments to your patches are missing. Add them. Send the patches
upstream.
I sent them upstream, but I doubt anything will happen as the maintainter
leaved message in January on the sourceforge page that he's taking break the
next few months/years...
Comments should go where?
- Add INSTALL=install -p to make install to preserve time stamps. Use
'cp -p' instead of 'cp' for the same reason.
Fixed (I hope).
- Don't mix %{name} and lbreakout2 in %files - use one or the other and stick
with it.
Changed two lines: '%{_datadir}/%{name}' and '%doc %{_docdir}/%{name}'. Hope
that's it?
- Remove the docdir created by install; just list the necessary files as %doc.
You mean by issuing 'rm -rf' on that directory? Otherwise, I have to generate
the patch to prevent doc installation by 'make install'. That probably wont be
accepted upstream...
Spec URL:
http://www.zemris.fer.hr/~sgros/stuff/fedora/lbreakout2/lbreakout2.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.zemris.fer.hr/~sgros/stuff/fedora/lbreakout2/lbreakout2-2.6-0.2.beta7.fc11.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516698] Review Request: fpaste - A simple tool for pasting info onto fpaste.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516698 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:20:13 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 514833] Review Request: sphinx - Free open-source SQL full-text search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514833 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:19:18 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507695] Review Request: python-sqlalchemy0.5 - Modular and flexible ORM library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507695 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #17 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:16:58 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516547] Review Request: Django-south - Intelligent schema migrations for Django apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516547 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:18:41 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517410] Review Request: django-piston - A mini-framework for Django for creating RESTful APIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517410 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:21:09 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-08-14 12:21:02 EDT --- Then okay. - This package (xrdp) is APPROVED by mtasaka - -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507110] Review Request: openal-soft - OpenAL-Soft lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507110 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #28 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 12:23:44 EDT --- I've gone ahead and branched this because it's not really up to me to make the decision of whether this should be built or not, but I would still urge you to avoid breaking other packages in the stable releases. CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507110] Review Request: openal-soft - OpenAL-Soft lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507110 --- Comment #30 from Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de 2009-08-14 12:27:22 EDT --- I will write the packager that uses opeanl an mail and say them that the must please upgrade thier 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 507110] Review Request: openal-soft - OpenAL-Soft lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507110 --- Comment #29 from Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de 2009-08-14 12:26:15 EDT --- The packager of AlienArena have requested that because it´s need to run correctly openal-soft because it segfaults with openal https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515109 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517409] Review Request: django-authority - A Django app for generic per-object permissions and custom permission checks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517409 Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 12:29:28 EDT --- Well, BAD: * rpmlint issues: django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._handling_admin.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._tips_tricks.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._installation.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._configuration.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._support.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._index.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._handling_template.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._create_per_object_permission.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/.theme/nature/._theme.conf django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/.static django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/.static django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._check_python.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/build/html/.buildinfo django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._documentation_guidelines.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/.theme django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/.theme django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._check_templates.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._create_basic_permission.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._handling_python.txt django-authority.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/django-authority-0.3/docs/._check_decorator.txt 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 20 warnings. Please fix this issues :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517466] Review Request: lbreakout2 - A breakout-style arcade game for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517466 --- Comment #3 from Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 12:36:51 EDT --- I corrected some warnings when running rpmlint on binary package. Spec URL: http://www.zemris.fer.hr/~sgros/stuff/fedora/lbreakout2/lbreakout2.spec SRPM URL: http://www.zemris.fer.hr/~sgros/stuff/fedora/lbreakout2/lbreakout2-2.6-0.3.beta7.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-08-14 12:55:13 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: xrdp Short Description: Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server Owners: itamarjp Branches: 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 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #20 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 13:11:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #19) Thanks for the precision, Spot. I'll do it very soon. But I wonder how to name and/or version the package, since this case is not listed in the package naming guidelines, and the packaged tarball will not match upstream's. I can imagine commenting the spec file like in the CVS snapshot case, but it is nether a prerelease, nor a postrelease (in fact, it is a custom release)... Can you help me on this topic ? Thank you. So, what you need to do is this: Take the tarball upstream provides and unpack it. Then, remove the files which we do not have permission to redistribute, and then make a new tarball with the same basename as the upstream tarball, but append -clean to the end of it. Finally, in the spec file, refer to the -clean tarball (without a URL), and add comments that point to the original upstream tarball and how you generated the new -clean tarball: # The upstream tarball contains icons which we could not determine the licensing # for. The original source was found here: http://foo.bar/baz.tar.gz # To generate the clean tarball, run: # tar xvfz baz.tar.gz # rm -rf baz/icons/*.png # tar cvfz baz-clean.tar.gz baz/ Source: baz-clean.tar.gz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516340] Review Request: fupt - Fedora Unity Paste tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516340 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |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 516340] Review Request: fupt - Fedora Unity Paste tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516340 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs- |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 514833] Review Request: sphinx - Free open-source SQL full-text search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514833 Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com 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 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #21 from Patrick Monnerat p...@datasphere.ch 2009-08-14 13:29:20 EDT --- Thanks Spot, but this was the clear part, and my question was not! My question is about package NAMING: is is a fourth case (after prerelease, snapshot and postrelease) where the %release should contain a specific alpha string ? (AFAIK, these are the only kind of packages that are allowed to contain a main tarball that is not directly downloadable from upstream). Or do I keep the regular package naming, breaking the downloadable from upstream rule ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 514540] Review Request: papyon - Python libraries for MSN Messenger network
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514540 Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 13:44:50 EDT --- Thanks for the review! I'll fix the script before importing into cvs. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: papyon Short Description: Python libraries for MSN Messenger network Owners: bpepple Branches: InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516340] Review Request: fupt - Fedora Unity Paste tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516340 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a.bad...@gmail.com Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #19 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 13:52:59 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516698] Review Request: fpaste - A simple tool for pasting info onto fpaste.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516698 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 13:55:03 EDT --- fpaste-0.3.2-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fpaste-0.3.2-2.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 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 13:53:28 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 514540] Review Request: papyon - Python libraries for MSN Messenger network
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514540 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-08-14 13:55:10 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #22 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 14:03:09 EDT --- Ah, I see. You're fine to keep the naming and versioning the same as if it was a normal package, just leave the clean off it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516698] Review Request: fpaste - A simple tool for pasting info onto fpaste.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516698 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 13:58:39 EDT --- fpaste-0.3.2-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fpaste-0.3.2-2.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 512021] Review Request: zikula-module-advanced_polls - Advanced voting system for Zikula
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=512021 Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||n...@fedoraproject.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|n...@fedoraproject.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:07:50 EDT --- I'll try to do this this weekend. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516547] Review Request: Django-south - Intelligent schema migrations for Django apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516547 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:14:42 EDT --- Django-south-0.6-2.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/Django-south-0.6-2.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516547] Review Request: Django-south - Intelligent schema migrations for Django apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516547 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:14:37 EDT --- Django-south-0.6-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/Django-south-0.6-2.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 517410] Review Request: django-piston - A mini-framework for Django for creating RESTful APIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517410 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:18:29 EDT --- django-piston-0.2.2-1.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/django-piston-0.2.2-1.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 517410] Review Request: django-piston - A mini-framework for Django for creating RESTful APIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517410 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:18:34 EDT --- django-piston-0.2.2-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/django-piston-0.2.2-1.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 517409] Review Request: django-authority - A Django app for generic per-object permissions and custom permission checks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517409 --- Comment #3 from Diego Búrigo Zacarão dieg...@gmail.com 2009-08-14 14:34:56 EDT --- Ops! Spec URL: http://diegobz.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-authority/django-authority.spec SRPM URL: http://diegobz.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-authority/django-authority-0.3-2.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:36:39 EDT --- xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.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 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:36:45 EDT --- xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.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 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:38:09 EDT --- xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.el4 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 4. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516364] Review Request: xrdp - Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516364 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-14 14:38:03 EDT --- xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xrdp-0.5.0-0.2.20090811cvs.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 --- Comment #23 from Patrick Monnerat p...@datasphere.ch 2009-08-14 14:36:24 EDT --- OK, thanks for the info. So here we are: New version: http://monnerat.fedorapeople.org/WebCalendar-1.2.0-8.fc10.src.rpm * Fri Aug 14 2009 Patrick Monnerat p...@datasphere.ch 1.2.0-8 - Use a custom source tarball to get rid of upstream icons with license issue. rpmlint output unchanged. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605649 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516971] Review Request: tokyotyrant - A network interface to Tokyo Cabinet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516971
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-08-14
14:39:45 EDT ---
Some notes:
! About tokyocabinet dependency
- Note that current latest package of tokyocabinet on koji
is tokyocabinet-1.4.30-1.fc12
( This already exists in koji dist-f12 buildroot, but has not
pushed to rawhide tree yet because of F12alpha freeze )
* Package name
- Usually development related package should be named as
tokyotyrant-devel, not tokyotyrant-libs-devel (even if
you create tokyotyrant-libs package)
* About removing rpath
- Please avoid to use chrpath binary as much as possible
for removing rpath but use more standard method
( Using chrpath --delete should be thought as the last
resort, which is usually not needed ).
For this package replacing LD_RUN_PATH with LD_LIBRARY_PATH
should remove rpath without using chrpath
* Macros
- Use %_initddir for %_sysconfdir/rc.d/init.d
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScripts#Initscripts_on_the_filesystem
* About %_libdir/ttskel*.so
- Would you explain how these binaries are used?
* Actually these binaries don't have sonames, don't have the names
libfoo.so,
so these don't seem to be system-wide libraries.
I suggest at least these libraries should be moved to package-specific
directory (like %_libdir/%name)
* Also I tried to find out how these binaries are used by using grep,
however
it seems these binaries are used nowhere...
* %files
- You don't have to add COPYING to all binary packages (only including
to -libs package is enough because -libs package is needed by all
packages)
By the way README, THANKS or so should also be moved to -libs subpackage
because tokyotyrant (binary rpm) depends on -libs subpackage and not
opposite.
* Dependency
- Main package must have strict dependency
Requires: %{name}-libs = %{version}-%{release}
- For example installed /usr/include/tcrdb.h contains:
---
30 #include tcutil.h
31 #include tcadb.h
---
so at least tokyotyrant-devel should have Requires: tokyocabinet-devel.
And tokyotyrant.pc should have Requires: tokyocabinet.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471231] Review Request: WebCalendar - Single/multi-user web-based calendar application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471231 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)| --- Comment #24 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-08-14 14:42:03 EDT --- 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
