[Bug 594481] Review Request: orion-ssh2 - SSH-2 protocol implementation in pure Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594481 --- Comment #14 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 02:09:02 EDT --- Hi Christian, I want to express my personal opinion on this issue. (In reply to comment #13) I am certainly not to be hold responsible for any private fork of the code base. Everybody is, of course, free to do so. IntelliJ IDEA, Hudson and DSSH all have their proper reasons to use a private fork (btw: unfortunately, they never came up with a feature request). The natural workflow for a OSS developer is: 1. find an issue in some project 2. checkout latest codebase to see whether it is not fixed 3. fix the problem for the latest codebase 4. send patch to the projects issue tracker (bugzilla, jira, mantis, whatever) Note that steps 2-4 are not possible for ganymed-ssh2. I know we can contact you in person and we have done that but I have to admit that these are things that will make a lot of people not consider it an opensource project resulting in them not trying to submit a feature request or patch. Please tell me if I'm wrong and I didn't managed to found these things on the site. Again, if there is any crucial feature missing in ganymed-ssh2 that is needed by some package in the Redhat tree then I will happily add it to the stable ganymed-ssh2 code base. As a packager I can show several things that are present in orion and missing in ganymed: * a source only tarballs - saves us the work to remove binaries from it * build files - saves us the work to compile manually * pom.xml file - saves us the work to come with our own for maven integration Don't take this as bashing ganymed I respect your work as the original author but the guys from orion has done the integration work to make trilead suitable and easy to use for bigger audience. In short everyone will win if you guys manage to join your efforts in one really opensource project. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 588435] Review Request: rubygem-libxml-ruby - libxml support 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=588435 --- Comment #15 from Matthew Kent mk...@magoazul.com 2010-05-26 02:24:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) Mamoru, Sorry, I was expecting that Matthew would post a corrected SRPM. I'll rebuild and post one later on today. Apologies for any confusion - yeah if you could steer this one home as I'm a bit short on time this 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 526567] Review Request: mongodb - high-performance, open source, schema-free document-oriented database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526567 --- Comment #14 from Maxim Burgerhout ma...@wzzrd.com 2010-05-26 03:15:41 EDT --- Are you waiting for a sponsor, a reviewer or both? You mentioned you already have a sponsor, so can't your sponsor review you package? It's a sponsor's job to do that. The Package Review Process document states that '[...] If it is the first package of a Contributor, the Reviewer must be a Sponsor.' If you have a sponsor, why not ping him or her to review your package? If you do not have a sponsor, set the FE-NEEDSPONSOR block, as per [1]. I am not a sponsor, so I cannot help you here. If I can assist you with anything else, let me know. I'll try my best. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595551] Review Request: ibus-table-mathwriter - ibus-table-mathwriter provides input method for writing Unicode Math symbols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595551 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Group|fedora_contrib | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595551] Review Request: ibus-table-mathwriter - ibus-table-mathwriter provides input method for writing Unicode Math symbols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595551 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Group||private CC||pnem...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595551] Review Request: ibus-table-mathwriter - ibus-table-mathwriter provides input method for writing Unicode Math symbols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595551 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Group|private | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595220] Review Request: buildnumber-maven-plugin - Build Number Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595220 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 02:41:40 EDT --- This is still not fixed: javadoc subpackage is missing requires on jpackage-utils And when you change something you should add a changelog entry. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595994] Review Request: cardo-fonts - This is designed for classicists, Biblical scholars, medievalists, linguists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595994 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||du...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|du...@redhat.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595993] Review Request: josefinsansstd-light-fonts - This typeface was to made for geometric, elegant titling and kind of vintage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595993 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||du...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|du...@redhat.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595993] Review Request: josefinsansstd-light-fonts - This typeface was to made for geometric, elegant titling and kind of vintage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595993 --- Comment #2 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 04:17:24 EDT --- I couldn't find any issue with the package, except the documentation: Summary: This typeface was to made for geometric, elegant titling and kind of vintage Could you make them clear, so that users can easily find out this package is a latin font? How about: Summary: A latin font that is geometric, elegant, and kind of vintage Also, how about expand %description to the entire paragraph of the original text on the web: %description: The idea for creating this typeface was to make it geometric, elegant and kind of vintage, especially for titling. It is based on Rudolf Koch's Kabel (1927), Rudolf Wolf's Memphis (1930),Paul Renner's Futura (1927?). http://code.google.com/webfonts/family?family=Josefin+Sans+Std+Light#description -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595993] Review Request: josefinsansstd-light-fonts - This typeface was to made for geometric, elegant titling and kind of vintage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595993 --- Comment #3 from Parag pnem...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 04:29:12 EDT --- Thanks for the review. Updated spec and SRPM Spec URL: http://paragn.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SPECS/josefinsansstd-light-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://paragn.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SRPMS/josefinsansstd-light-fonts-1.000-1.fc13.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 591305] Review Request: apache-commons-digester - XML to Java object mapping module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=591305 --- Comment #15 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 04:32:30 EDT --- I just built apache-commons-beanutils so it should be available as a dep in koji in about an hour. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595749] Review Request: apache-commons-jxpath - rename of jakarta-commons-jxpath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595749 Bug 595749 depends on bug 594756, which changed state. Bug 594756 Summary: Review Request: apache-commons-beanutils - rename of jakarta-commons-beanutils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594756 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 594756] Review Request: apache-commons-beanutils - rename of jakarta-commons-beanutils
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594756 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 04:31:02 EDT --- Package built in koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=175137 Thanks all. Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595994] Review Request: cardo-fonts - This is designed for classicists, Biblical scholars, medievalists, linguists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595994 --- Comment #3 from Parag pnem...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 04:45:50 EDT --- Thanks for the review. Updated spec and SRPM Spec URL: http://paragn.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SPECS/cardo-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://paragn.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SRPMS/cardo-fonts-0.098-1.fc13.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 563844] Review Request: zim - A Desktop Wiki Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563844 --- Comment #48 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 05:09:28 EDT --- Or this request can be considered as a renaming one. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Renaming_Process -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595993] Review Request: josefinsansstd-light-fonts - This typeface was to made for geometric, elegant titling and kind of vintage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595993 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:15:19 EDT --- Looks 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595994] Review Request: cardo-fonts - This is designed for classicists, Biblical scholars, medievalists, linguists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595994 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:17:34 EDT --- Looks 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595220] Review Request: buildnumber-maven-plugin - Build Number Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595220 --- Comment #4 from Weinan Li w...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:20:35 EDT --- - Add requires on jpackage-utils for javadoc subpackage - Add standard jpackage-utils requires on main package - Use global instead of define - Fix license to MIT - Fix incoherent-version-in-changelog Spec URL: http://weli.fedorapeople.org/packages/fedora-14/bmp/buildnumber-maven-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://weli.fedorapeople.org/packages/fedora-14/bmp/buildnumber-maven-plugin-1.0-0.2.b4.src.rpm Note: - This needs to be built in the dist-f14-maven221 koji tag. Here is a successful koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2210229 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 594839] Review Request: kpartsplugin - KParts technology to embed file viewers into non-KDE browsers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594839
Magnus Tuominen magnus.tuomi...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||magnus.tuomi...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Magnus Tuominen magnus.tuomi...@gmail.com 2010-05-26
05:20:23 EDT ---
Hi Thomas.
This is my informal review:
* MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
- OK
- output:
kpartsplugin.i686: I: checking
kpartsplugin.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) KParts - K Parts, KP arts,
KP-arts
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
kpartsplugin.i686: I: checking-url
http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=125066 (timeout 10 seconds)
kpartsplugin.src: I: checking
kpartsplugin.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) KParts - K Parts, KP arts,
KP-arts
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
kpartsplugin.src: I: checking-url
http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=125066 (timeout 10 seconds)
kpartsplugin.src: I: checking-url
http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~fischer/kpartsplugin/kpartsplugin-20100521.tar.bz2
(timeout 10 seconds)
kpartsplugin-debuginfo.i686: I: checking
kpartsplugin-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url
http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=125066 (timeout 10 seconds)
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
* 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.
- 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: BSD
* MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
- NOT OK: License is GPLv3+ according to $homepage (GPL), and README.txt
(GPLv3+).
* MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
- OK
* MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- OK
* MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
- OK
- Homepage should be http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~fischer/kpartsplugin/
* MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
- 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, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
- OK
* MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
- OK
* MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
- OK, no locales.
* MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
- OK, no shared libs.
* MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
- OK
* MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
- OK
* MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
- NOT SURE
* 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, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
- 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. (The definition
of large is
[Bug 596074] New: Review Request: multithreadedtc - A framework for testing concuurent Java application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: multithreadedtc - A framework for testing concuurent Java application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596074 Summary: Review Request: multithreadedtc - A framework for testing concuurent Java application Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: huw...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/multithreadedtc/multithreadedtc.spec SRPM URL: http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/multithreadedtc/multithreadedtc-1.0.1-1.src.rpm Description: MultithreadedTC is a framework for testing concurrent applications. It features a metronome that is used to provide fine control over the sequence of activities in multiple threads. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596074] Review Request: multithreadedtc - A framework for testing concuurent Java 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=596074 --- Comment #1 from huwang huw...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:36:10 EDT --- Notes: - Built in koji with dist-f14-maven221 target, the link is http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2210222 - Adding build.patch that remove retrotranslator dependency and pom, the package link is http://huwang.fedorapeople.org/packages/multithreadedtc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595269] Review Request: lobster-fonts - Hand written font with various ligatures for better connecting of letters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595269 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Parag pnem...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:52:16 EDT --- Thank you for the review Daiki. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: lobster-fonts Short Description: Hand written font with various ligatures for better connecting of letters Owners: pnemade Branches: F-13 InitialCC: fonts-sig i18n-team -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595268] Review Request: tangerine-fonts - Tangerine is a calligraphy font inspired by many italic chancery hands
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595268 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Parag pnem...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:52:06 EDT --- Thank you for the review Daiki. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: tangerine-fonts Short Description: Tangerine is a calligraphy font inspired by many italic chancery hands Owners: pnemade Branches: F-13 InitialCC: fonts-sig i18n-team -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595994] Review Request: cardo-fonts - A font for scholarly use in classical and medieval languages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595994 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: cardo-fonts |Review Request: cardo-fonts |- This is designed for |- A font for scholarly use |classicists, Biblical |in classical and medieval |scholars, medievalists, |languages |linguists | Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Parag pnem...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:52:28 EDT --- Thank you for the review Daiki. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: cardo-fonts Short Description: A font for scholarly use in classical and medieval languages Owners: pnemade Branches: F-13 InitialCC: fonts-sig i18n-team -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595993] Review Request: josefinsansstd-light-fonts - A latin font that is geometric, elegant, and kind of vintage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595993 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |josefinsansstd-light-fonts |josefinsansstd-light-fonts |- This typeface was to made |- A latin font that is |for geometric, elegant |geometric, elegant, and |titling and kind of vintage |kind of vintage Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Parag pnem...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:52:21 EDT --- Thank you for the review Daiki. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: josefinsansstd-light-fonts Short Description: A latin font that is geometric, elegant, and kind of vintage Owners: pnemade Branches: F-13 InitialCC: fonts-sig i18n-team -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596074] Review Request: multithreadedtc - A framework for testing concuurent Java 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=596074 --- Comment #2 from huwang huw...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 05:55:46 EDT --- I rebuild this package in koji with dist-f14-maven221 target, here is the link: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2210261 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 546376] Review Request: ghc-chalmers-lava2000 - Haskell hardware description 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=546376 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(shakthim...@gmail ||.com) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596074] Review Request: multithreadedtc - A framework for testing concuurent Java 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=596074 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 07:15:53 EDT --- Please add a depmap for multithreadedtc-jdk14 to point to the multithreadedtc jar. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596125] New: Review Request: maven-skins - Maven Skins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: maven-skins - Maven Skins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596125 Summary: Review Request: maven-skins - Maven Skins 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-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/maven-skins.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/maven-skins-5-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: Skins for the maven site generator. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596125] Review Request: maven-skins - Maven Skins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596125 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||socho...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|socho...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 08:17:19 EDT --- I can take 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 581279] Review Request: erlang-ibrowse - Erlang HTTP client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=581279 David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dcantr...@redhat.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596125] Review Request: maven-skins - Maven Skins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596125
--- Comment #2 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2010-05-26
09:19:17 EDT ---
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
maven-skins.src: W: invalid-url Source0: maven-skins-5.tar.xz
maven-skins.noarch: W: no-documentation
maven-skins.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/maven-skins
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
It might be nice to actually describe why it's needed to use
repository. I assume it's because it's not packaged separately from maven. That
is also why there is no separate documentation. Am I correct?
OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. .
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK(koji): The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a
directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that
directory.
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the
files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for
example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the
files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that
you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns,
then please present that at package review time.
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Other:
you have:
install -pm 644 maven-application-skin/pom.xml \
%{buildroot}%{_mavenpomdir}/JPP.%{name}-maven-application-skin.pom
and then
%add_to_maven_depmap org.apache.maven.skins maven-application-skin %{version}
JPP/maven-skins maven-application-skin
Is this going to work? You install for example
/usr/share/maven2/poms/JPP.maven-skins-maven-application-skin.pom
and then tell maven that it's JPP/maven-skins groupID and
maven-application-skin artifactId. Shouldn't last argument to
add_to_maven_depmap be: %{name}-maven-application-skin ? Or alternatively
change install and leave add_to_maven_depmap be?
So please just explain this thing and why you used SVN and I can approve this
package, because otherwise it's 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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 585754] Review Request: dbusmenu-qt - A Qt implementation of the DBusMenu protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=585754 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 09:16:03 EDT --- dbusmenu-qt-0.3.3-1.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dbusmenu-qt-0.3.3-1.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 537983] Review Request: python-visual - 3D Programming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537983 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(pikachu.2...@gmai ||l.com) --- Comment #22 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 09:35:37 EDT --- Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/python-visual.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/python-visual-5.32-4.fc13.src.rpm Changes: - doc subpackage needs to be non-noarch Mohamed: Do you still plan a review here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596125] Review Request: maven-skins - Maven Skins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596125 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 09:45:53 EDT --- (lightbulb over my head). Everything is clear now. Thanks for explaining. This package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 591926] Review Request: erlang-mochiweb - An Erlang library for building lightweight HTTP servers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=591926
David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co
||m)
--- Comment #1 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 09:57:54
EDT ---
[+] PASSED [-] FAILED [N/A] Not Applicable
+ MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
dcant...@mitre SRPMS$ rpmlint erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm
erlang-mochiweb.src: W: invalid-url Source0: erlang-mochiweb-0.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
(This can be ignored as the source is pulled from svn, the comments explain how
to do that.)
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
Package version and release should use the %{alphatag} format as documented
here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines
+ MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
+ MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
+ MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
+ MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
+ MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
+ MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
+ MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
+ MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
+ MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
$ koji build --scratch dist-f13 erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm
Uploading srpm: erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm
[] 100% 00:00:03 80.87 KiB 22.00 KiB/sec
Created task: 2210525
Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2210525
None
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
2210525 build (dist-f13, erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm): open
(xb-01.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2210528 buildArch (erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm, i686): free
2210527 buildArch (erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm, x86_64): open
(x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2210528 buildArch (erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm, i686): free -
open (x86-03.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2210527 buildArch (erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm, x86_64): open
(x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - closed
0 free 2 open 1 done 0 failed
2210528 buildArch (erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm, i686): open
(x86-03.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - closed
0 free 1 open 2 done 0 failed
2210525 build (dist-f13, erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm): open
(xb-01.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - closed
0 free 0 open 3 done 0 failed
2210525 build (dist-f13, erlang-mochiweb-0-0.1.svn154.fc13.src.rpm) completed
successfully
N/A MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
+ MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
N/A MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
N/A MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
+ MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
N/A MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
+ MUST: A package must own all directories that it
[Bug 590355] Review Request: golly - cellular automata simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590355 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 10:10:49 EDT --- It doesn't build in F-13 x86_64 /builddir/build/BUILD/golly-2.1-src/wxperl.cpp:2560: undefined reference to `Per l_newSV_type' ObjGTK/wxperl.o: In function `pl_getclip': /builddir/build/BUILD/golly-2.1-src/wxperl.cpp:1566: undefined reference to `Perl_newSV_type' ObjGTK/wxperl.o: In function `pl_join': /builddir/build/BUILD/golly-2.1-src/wxperl.cpp:1454: undefined reference to `Perl_newSV_type' ObjGTK/wxperl.o: In function `pl_getcells': /builddir/build/BUILD/golly-2.1-src/wxperl.cpp:1380: undefined reference to `Perl_newSV_type' /builddir/build/BUILD/golly-2.1-src/wxperl.cpp:1380: undefined reference to `Perl_newSV_type' ObjGTK/wxperl.o:/builddir/build/BUILD/golly-2.1-src/wxperl.cpp:1186: more undefined references to `Perl_newSV_type' follow collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [golly] Error 1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590355] Review Request: golly - cellular automata simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590355 --- Comment #9 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 10:11:48 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=416851) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=416851) Mock build log in F-13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593800] Review Request: python-keyring - keyring module 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=593800 --- Comment #8 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 11:12:20 EDT --- You can have a look to this: https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=python-keyring.specpackage=python-keyringproject=home:sergiopasra Notice that the spec file has a few SUSEisms. The spec has subpackages python-keyring-gnome and python-keyring-kwallet for gnome and kde backends (that's what debian does: http://packages.debian.org/sid/python-keyring) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596074] Review Request: multithreadedtc - A framework for testing concuurent Java 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=596074 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 11:26:31 EDT --- * Why don't you use upstream tarball http://multithreadedtc.googlecode.com/files/MultithreadedTC-1.01-source.zip ? Please use it. Note that you'll have to remove the jars from it. * You're missing Requires: jpackage-utils Requires(post): jpackage-utils Requires(postun): jpackage-utils They are needed because you invoke update_maven_depmap * You're missing Requires: jpackage-utils for the javadoc subpackage * Please remove ls -lR from install section * Please fix the following rpmlint warnings: multithreadedtc.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C It features a metronome that is used to provide fine control over the sequence of activities in multiple threads. Fix line length multithreadedtc.noarch: W: no-documentation You should include LICENSE.txt and README.txt as %doc multithreadedtc-javadoc.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/javadoc/multithreadedtc-1.0.1/package-list multithreadedtc-javadoc.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/javadoc/multithreadedtc-1.0.1/stylesheet.css You should fix these by doing sed -i 's/\r//' file_to_strip for both of them in the %prep section. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 537983] Review Request: python-visual - 3D Programming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537983 --- Comment #24 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 10:41:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #23) I'm still following this challenging review ^^. Good to read :) Maybe you should not use the %exclude tag in %files, files tagges with it are included into the calculated size whereas they are not installed. About the arch-ed doc package, I'm quite disappointed. If the examples, as supposed by their name, are not required to run visual, they should be considered to be documentation also, and set as %doc too. The reason, why I used %exclude was that, this is the easiest way to include the examples into the doc package, without to differ from upstream. Now I simply delete the examples and docs completely and include them as %doc in the doc package. This way it's slightly different from upstream, but the doc package is noarch again and %exclude is gone now: Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/python-visual.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/python-visual-5.32-5.fc13.src.rpm Hope that is better 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596138] Review Request: NSS-GUI - A graphical user interface for NSS security databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596138 --- Comment #1 from Kai Engert (kaie) keng...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 11:39:12 EDT --- Updated spec: URL: https://fedorahosted.org/nss-gui/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 581279] Review Request: erlang-ibrowse - Erlang HTTP client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=581279
David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co
||m)
--- Comment #4 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 11:58:18
EDT ---
[+] PASS[-] FAIL [N/A] Not Applicable
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
$ rpmlint erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm
erlang-ibrowse.src: W: invalid-url Source0: erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6.tar.bz2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
The Source0 line needs to use the %{alphatag} naming format since you are
pulling from git. I see you're pulling from a git commit, but if there's a tag
for the 1.5.6 release, that might be better to use.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#SnapshotPackages
+ MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
+ MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
+ MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
The License field indicates 'BSD or LGPLv2' but it should be 'BSD and LGPLv2'.
+ MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
+ MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
These are really just my own opinion. In general I think the spec file is
perfectly legible, but since we are in review, I figured I'd point out these
things:
1) The Requires: lines do not use a tab character to indent the value to the
16th column like the Name through BuildRequires lines.
2) The iconv line in the %prep section is long. I would suggest breaking up
the line because the spill over on an 80 column terminal makes the rm -f
README.utf8 appear to be its own line, when really it's part of the entire
iconv line.
+ MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
+ MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
$ koji build --scratch dist-f13 erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm
Uploading srpm: erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm
[] 100% 00:00:01 40.06 KiB 22.30 KiB/sec
Created task: 2211092
Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2211092
None
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
2211092 build (dist-f13, erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm): free
2211092 build (dist-f13, erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm): free - open
(ppc04.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2211094 buildArch (erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm, i686): free
2211093 buildArch (erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm, x86_64): free
2211093 buildArch (erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm, x86_64): free - open
(x86-09.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2211094 buildArch (erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm, i686): free - open
(x86-04.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2211094 buildArch (erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm, i686): open
(x86-04.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - closed
0 free 2 open 1 done 0 failed
2211093 buildArch (erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm, x86_64): open
(x86-09.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - closed
0 free 1 open 2 done 0 failed
2211092 build (dist-f13, erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm): open
(ppc04.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - closed
0 free 0 open 3 done 0 failed
2211092 build (dist-f13, erlang-ibrowse-1.5.6-2.fc13.src.rpm) completed
successfully
N/A MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
+ MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional.
[Bug 591011] Review Request: kfilefactory - An easy to use filefactory.com uploader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=591011 Magnus Tuominen magnus.tuomi...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||magnus.tuomi...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Magnus Tuominen magnus.tuomi...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 13:01:22 EDT --- I'll make an informal review for you sometime tomorrow. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 591305] Review Request: apache-commons-digester - XML to Java object mapping module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=591305 Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #16 from Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk 2010-05-26 13:13:18 EDT --- Thanks, this is built in Rawhide now, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226103] Merge Review: log4j
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226103 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|socho...@redhat.com QAContact|fedora-package-rev...@redha |akurt...@redhat.com |t.com | Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 13:12:37 EDT --- Stanislav, I would like if we can finish this review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 582106] Review Request: lifeograph - Private digital diary.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=582106
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 #7 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-05-26
14:45:37 EDT ---
From next time please change the release number every time
you modify your spec file (when version number doesn't change)
to avoid confusion, even during under review process.
Now for new -1:
! Comments
- It is better that you remove comments which are no longer
needed for readability.
! %clean section
- If you want to import this package into F-12, %clean section
is still needed.
* Duplicate files entry:
-
145 warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/pixmaps/lifeograph
146 warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/pixmaps/lifeograph.png
147 warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/pixmaps/lifeograph/backgrounds
148 warning: File listed twice:
/usr/share/pixmaps/lifeograph/backgrounds/bg.png
149 warning: File listed twice:
/usr/share/pixmaps/lifeograph/backgrounds/bg.png
-
- Note that the %files entry
-
%files
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/lifeograph
-
contains the directory %_datadir/pixmaps/lifeograph and all
files/directories/etc under this directory.
Also this package should not own the directory %{_datadir}/pixmaps itself.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592655] yelp-xsl XSL stylesheets for use with yelp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592655 Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mbar...@redhat.com AssignedTo|methe...@gmail.com |mbar...@redhat.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] New: Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 Summary: Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: avaga...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: spec info here SRPM URL: srpm info here Description: I have created a NetworkManager-openswan package, and I would appreciate a review so that I can get into Fedora Extras! This package is a plugin to Network Manager for configuring VPN connections using Openswan (an IPsec open source). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 582106] Review Request: lifeograph - Private digital diary.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=582106 --- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-05-26 14:51:16 EDT --- Now: - NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few (or no) work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a pre-review of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on my wiki page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mtasaka#B._Review_request_tickets (Check No one is reviewing) Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets I see your another review request for webmit (bug 586327), however currently the spec file is too complicated and needs refresh. So I would expect another review request from you or your pre-review of other person's review request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 --- Comment #2 from Avesh Agarwal avaga...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 14:54:53 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=416978) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=416978) NetworkManager-openswan srpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 --- Comment #1 from Avesh Agarwal avaga...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 14:54:23 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=416977) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=416977) NetworkManager-openswan spec file -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 515752] Review Request: python-soaplib - python library for creating SOAP services
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515752 --- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-05-26 15:10:03 EDT --- Well, first of all the tarball in your srpm and the one I could download from the URL written in your Source0 completely differ: 634880 2010-05-13 06:21 python-soaplib-0.8.1-1.fc12.src/soaplib-0.8.1.tar 276480 2009-07-14 19:29 soaplib-0.8.1.tar Would you surely you the tarball provided by the upstream and recreate the srpm? Note that please change the release number to avoid confusion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596461] Review Request: lzma - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||564522 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596461] New: Review Request: lzma - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lzma - SDK for lzma compression https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 Summary: Review Request: lzma - SDK for lzma compression Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: l...@jcomserv.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Description: LZMA SDK provides the documentation, samples, header files, libraries, and tools you need to develop applications that use LZMA compression. LZMA is default and general compression method of 7z format in 7-Zip compression program (www.7-zip.org). LZMA provides high compression ratio and very fast decompression. LZMA is an improved version of famous LZ77 compression algorithm. It was improved in way of maximum increasing of compression ratio, keeping high decompression speed and low memory requirements for decompressing. SRPM: http://zanoni.jcomserv.net/fedora/lzma-sdk/lzma-sdk-4.6.5-1.fc12.src.rpm SPEC: http://zanoni.jcomserv.net/fedora/lzma-sdk/lzma-sdk.spec Packaged primarily for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564522 Does not build a library, merely provides the sdk to build against. Not sure if I've packaged it entirely correctly, but I have upx building against it on my machine. I know there are encoding issues on the docs, not sure how to fix them, as I'm already fixing others and these should be picked up also. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 563844] Review Request: zim - A Desktop Wiki Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563844 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a.bad...@gmail.com --- Comment #49 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 15:18:35 EDT --- IIUC everything going on in these two tickets we have the following facts: 1) We cannot have both zim and Zim packages as those package names conflict according to our guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Conflicts#Conflicting_Package_Names 1b) We probably do not have a tooling problem (there were tooling issues in the past and I think we've resolved them all) however, this is not a well tested case and thus new issues can arise without us noticing. 2) The upstream for zim has released a new version of their software that is incompatible with the old version. Some people (including the present Fedora Maintainer) do not want to upgrade. We give broad latitude to maintainers but this does seem to be counter to the Fedora Objectives: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives 3) The Fedora maintainer for the previous version of zim wants to fork but hasn't done so yet. 4) The new zim release has been packaged and has a maintainer willing to work on it. 5) Neither the upstream zim nor the incipient fork of zim have decided to rename their software yet. I'm not sure where we are in regards to contacting upstream: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Conflicts#Approaching_Upstream 5b) Since a Fedora Maintainer is making the fork of the old zim, it would behoove us to set a good example and have the fork rename. 6) This can go to fesco to decide if the competing Fedora maintainers can't settle their differences on their own. The questions I think are coming up here are: * Should the zim package have to update to a current, supported version, at least in rawhide? * In case of a fork initiated by a Fedora maintainer, should we force the fork to adopt change to a non-conflicting name (if the package is to remain in the Fedora repositories)? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592655] yelp-xsl XSL stylesheets for use with yelp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592655
--- Comment #1 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 15:20:38 EDT
---
rpmlint output:
yelp-xsl.src: I: checking
yelp-xsl.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) stylesheets - style sheets,
style-sheets, stylishness
yelp-xsl.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stylesheets - style
sheets, style-sheets, stylishness
yelp-xsl.src: W: non-standard-group Unspecified
yelp-xsl.src: I: checking-url http://download.gnome.org/sources/yelp-xsl
(timeout 10 seconds)
yelp-xsl.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
yelp-xsl.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
yelp-xsl.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
yelp-xsl.src: W: no-%clean-section
yelp-xsl.src: I: checking-url
http://download.gnome.org/sources/yelp-xsl/2.31/yelp-xsl-2.31.1.tar.bz2
(timeout 10 seconds)
Builds fine, md5sum of tarball matches upstream.
no-buildroot-tag and no-%clean-section can be ignored per packaging
guidelines.
I guess the other cleaning warnings can be ignored too since there's nothing to
clean.
Not sure what the Group tag should be; yelp's is Applications/System.
I'll leave it to you to fix or ignore the spelling errors. I guess technically
it's two words.
Typo: missing opening brace for %{version} in devel package.
Otherwise looks correct to 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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 --- Comment #3 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 15:28:54 EDT --- Some non-packaging review points: - NM-vpnc describes itself in the UI as for 'Cisco Compatible VPN' - This describes itself in the UI as for 'IPSec based VPNs (Openswan)' 1) this should use 'VPNs' instead of 'VPN' 2) I don't know that '(Openswan)' is a useful detail to show the user Also, it appears that this only supports Cisco-style xauth+ike VPNs. As I understand it, Openswan supports a variety of auth mechanisms (certificates, etc.) that this isn't exposing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 --- Comment #4 from Avesh Agarwal avaga...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 15:45:30 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Some non-packaging review points: - NM-vpnc describes itself in the UI as for 'Cisco Compatible VPN' - This describes itself in the UI as for 'IPSec based VPNs (Openswan)' 1) this should use 'VPNs' instead of 'VPN' NetworkManager-openswan has VPNs. Not sure if i understood you correctly. 2) I don't know that '(Openswan)' is a useful detail to show the user Showing Openswan is necessary, because it is only specific to Openswan. So users should be able to know that this plugin only works with Openswan. Also, it appears that this only supports Cisco-style xauth+ike VPNs. As I understand it, Openswan supports a variety of auth mechanisms (certificates, etc.) that this isn't exposing. You are right. I am exposing only XAUTH and PSK based VPNs right now mainly like road-warrior connections. But that does not mean that it not only works with Cisco VPN servers. It can also work other vpn servers that supports XAUTH+PSK. By doing this would help a lot to get feedback from various users who mostly use it with Cisco VPN servers. As I have NetworkManager-openswan helper in place now, adding other features would mainly require GUI changes only, and some minor changes in the helper. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 --- Comment #5 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 16:03:28 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) - NM-vpnc describes itself in the UI as for 'Cisco Compatible VPN' - This describes itself in the UI as for 'IPSec based VPNs (Openswan)' 1) this should use 'VPNs' instead of 'VPN' NetworkManager-openswan has VPNs. Not sure if i understood you correctly. It should be changed to 'VPN' to be consistent. 2) I don't know that '(Openswan)' is a useful detail to show the user Showing Openswan is necessary, because it is only specific to Openswan. So users should be able to know that this plugin only works with Openswan. No, the plugin will talk to any IPSEC gateway that implements the same xauth/PSK authentication. If you mean it only works with openswan as a backend for this NM vpn plugin, that should be expressed just with RPM dependencies, not with a UI string - the user shouldn't have to care that openswan is being used under the hood. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 --- Comment #6 from Avesh Agarwal avaga...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 16:19:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) (In reply to comment #4) - NM-vpnc describes itself in the UI as for 'Cisco Compatible VPN' - This describes itself in the UI as for 'IPSec based VPNs (Openswan)' 1) this should use 'VPNs' instead of 'VPN' NetworkManager-openswan has VPNs. Not sure if i understood you correctly. It should be changed to 'VPN' to be consistent. Ok. changed. 2) I don't know that '(Openswan)' is a useful detail to show the user Showing Openswan is necessary, because it is only specific to Openswan. So users should be able to know that this plugin only works with Openswan. No, the plugin will talk to any IPSEC gateway that implements the same xauth/PSK authentication. If you mean it only works with openswan as a backend for this NM vpn plugin, that should be expressed just with RPM dependencies, not with a UI string - the user shouldn't have to care that openswan is being used under the hood. ok, changed. Thanks. Avesh -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 594839] Review Request: kpartsplugin - KParts technology to embed file viewers into non-KDE browsers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594839
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26
16:32:16 EDT ---
Hi Magnus, thanks for the review!
* MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
- OK: BSD
* MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
- NOT OK: License is GPLv3+ according to $homepage (GPL), and README.txt
(GPLv3+).
Seems i confused two packages. FIXED
* MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
- NOT SURE
see below
* MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time.
- NOT SURE:
- %files section has
%{_kde4_libdir}/nsbrowser
but I think
%{_kde4_libdir}/nsbrowser/plugins/libkpartsplugin.so
is more appropriate.
* SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
- NOT OK, firefox did not find the plugin.
mock build fedora-13-x86_64.
However, firefox found the plugin after cd /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/ ln
-s /usr/lib64/nsbrowser/plugins/libkpartsplugin.so
I changed the install path to ../mozilla/plugins/ and added mozilla-filesystem
to requires for directory ownership. FIXED
Both oversights well spotted. 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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 594839] Review Request: kpartsplugin - KParts technology to embed file viewers into non-KDE browsers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594839 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 16:34:57 EDT --- Stupid me.. http://thomasj.fedorapeople.org/reviews/kpartsplugin-0.0.1-0.2.20100521.fc12.src.rpm http://thomasj.fedorapeople.org/reviews/kpartsplugin.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 591730] Review Request: pyjamas - A python to Javascript compiler, Widget set, Framework and Toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=591730
Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalc...@redhat.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dmalc...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 17:32:03 EDT
---
Broadly-speaking, this looks like a sane packaging of pyjamas.
A few nits:
# NOTE: we only byte-compile the library files.
# This is because:
# DO NOT install the pyjamas libraries into /usr/share/python-support,
# /usr/lib/python2.N/site-packages or ANY location where the standard
# python interpreter could possibly pick them up. The pyjamas libraries
# have nothing to do with python libraries when used by the compiler,
# and contain replacements for sys.py, time.py and other modules that
# are critical to pyjamas. It goes without saying that if you overwrite
# the standard python modules with the pyjamas equivalents, you will run into
# massive problems. Don't do it.
I found the above specfile comment a little unclear; it looks like it was
copied from upstream instructions, but it immediately raises questions: do the
pyjamas libraries get installed, and if so where?
%description desktop
Typo: s/he /The /
In the %files for the core package, you use:
%{python_sitelib}/*
Is it possible to be a bit more explicit on this line? Especially with the
comment above, you've got me feeling paranoid about exactly what the payload of
the package is.
Pyjamas provides reimplementations of various parts of the standard library, in
a mix of pure python and JS (see pyjs/src/pyjs/lib/)
License may be more complex that the specfile indicates; there's lots of info
in the copyright file in the tarball, with a variety of licenses.
builder/boilerplate/pygwt.js has the comment // this is almost directly taken
from Google's GWT which is now open source: may want to clarify that this is
properly licensed.
Somewhat ironically, contrib/copyright_check.py (debian copyright file
checker) doesn't seem to have a license
(still reading through the tarball)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593274] Review Request: rubygem-will_paginate - Most awesome pagination solution for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593274 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 17:39:41 EDT --- rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.12-2.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593274] Review Request: rubygem-will_paginate - Most awesome pagination solution for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593274 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.1 ||2-2.fc11 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 563013] Review Request: gnome-applet-remmina - GNOME panel applet for Remmina remote desktop client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563013 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 17:42:59 EDT --- gnome-applet-remmina-0.7.3-1.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 563013] Review Request: gnome-applet-remmina - GNOME panel applet for Remmina remote desktop client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563013 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|gnome-applet-remmina-0.7.3- |gnome-applet-remmina-0.7.3- |1.fc13 |1.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596138] Review Request: NSS-GUI - A graphical user interface for NSS security databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596138 --- Comment #2 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 17:40:41 EDT --- What's the usage case for this that isn't solved by just going through the Firefox (/thunderbird/xulrunner) dialogs directly? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593274] Review Request: rubygem-will_paginate - Most awesome pagination solution for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593274 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.1 |rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.1 |2-2.fc11|2-2.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593274] Review Request: rubygem-will_paginate - Most awesome pagination solution for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593274 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 17:47:59 EDT --- rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.12-2.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 563013] Review Request: gnome-applet-remmina - GNOME panel applet for Remmina remote desktop client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563013 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 17:50:27 EDT --- gnome-applet-remmina-0.7.3-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596138] Review Request: NSS-GUI - A graphical user interface for NSS security databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596138 Kai Engert (kaie) keng...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||466626 --- Comment #3 from Kai Engert (kaie) keng...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 17:48:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) What's the usage case for this that isn't solved by just going through the Firefox (/thunderbird/xulrunner) dialogs directly? Firefox will always edit the database associated with a profile, but NSS-GUI can - be used to edit the global systemwide NSS database located at /etc/pki/nssdb - be used to edit a database located at a specific location, which e.g. might be used for any other NSS based application, maybe related to some CA tool? - people have asked for such a tool, see bug 466626 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593274] Review Request: rubygem-will_paginate - Most awesome pagination solution for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593274 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.1 |rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.1 |2-2.fc12|2-2.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 563013] Review Request: gnome-applet-remmina - GNOME panel applet for Remmina remote desktop client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563013 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|gnome-applet-remmina-0.7.3- |gnome-applet-remmina-0.7.3- |1.fc12 |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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573741] Review Request: RBTools - Tools for interacting with ReviewBoard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573741 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 17:51:15 EDT --- RBTools-0.2-5.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update RBTools'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/RBTools-0.2-5.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593274] Review Request: rubygem-will_paginate - Most awesome pagination solution for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593274 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 17:50:39 EDT --- rubygem-will_paginate-2.3.12-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 484423] Review Request: netbook-launcher - A clutter-based desktop launcher
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484423 Juan Manuel Rodriguez nus...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nus...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #19 from Juan Manuel Rodriguez nus...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 18:54:22 EDT --- Hey Michel, if you're no longer interested, would you mind if I took the package instead? I'll take radio silence by Friday, May 28 as a '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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542715] Review Request: RabbitVCS - Easy version control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542715 --- Comment #19 from Juan Manuel Rodriguez nus...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 19:15:54 EDT --- Ok, I think I got it: I wasn't sure what wrt is, so I just fixed the typos but left the commented out sections in. SPEC: http://nushio.fedorapeople.org/rabbitvcs/rabbitvcs.spec SRPM: http://nushio.fedorapeople.org/rabbitvcs/rabbitvcs-0.13.1-2.fc13.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2211869 Changes: added rabbitvcs-core, which is noarch. Moved the binaries to rabbitvcs-core Fixed the typos on the thunar comments -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542715] Review Request: RabbitVCS - Easy version control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542715
--- Comment #20 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2010-05-26 19:35:18 EDT
---
You can now also drop:
Obsoletes: rabbitvcs-core 0.13-2
I'd suggest to move the remaining items in rabbitvcs package to -core:
-f %{title}.lang
%doc AUTHORS COPYING MAINTAINERS
%{_datadir}/%{name}/
The Requires of the rabbitvcs package now belong to -core:
Requires: pygtk2
Requires: pysvn
Requires: python-configobj
Requires: subversion
Requires: meld
Requires: nautilus-python = 0.5.2
Requires: pygtk2-libglade
The following Provides and Obsoletes should probably go to -nautilus subpackage
instead to ensure smooth update experience:
#RabbitVCS is the new name for NautilusSVN.
Provides: nautilussvn = %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: nautilussvn 0.13
-core subpackage lacks defattr().
%post/%postun/%posttrans need to be changed to run for -core subpackage.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 563844] Review Request: zim - A Desktop Wiki Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563844 --- Comment #50 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 19:43:17 EDT --- * From a view point of end user, the update from the Perl-based to the Python-based zim will be smooth expectedly. It will be an incompatible case only if somebody used what the package provides as Perl/Python modules strangely. * There were usually no forks remaining naming as their origins, though the names were probably not registered trademarks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542715] Review Request: RabbitVCS - Easy version control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542715 --- Comment #21 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2010-05-26 19:47:17 EDT --- -core subpackage also doesn't need Provides: rabbitvcs-core -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841 --- Comment #13 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 19:52:32 EDT --- Any update on this package 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542715] Review Request: RabbitVCS - Easy version control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542715 --- Comment #22 from Juan Manuel Rodriguez nus...@fedoraproject.org 2010-05-26 19:53:29 EDT --- SPEC: http://nushio.fedorapeople.org/rabbitvcs/rabbitvcs.spec SRPM: http://nushio.fedorapeople.org/rabbitvcs/rabbitvcs-0.13.1-2.fc13.src.rpm Did the changes you mentioned. I had completely forgotten to move the Requires from rabbitvcs to rabbitvcs-core, and I never considered the obsoletes/provides on the -nautilus subpackage. Fixed the defattrs, and fixed the post/un/trans -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596461] Review Request: lzma - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||supercyp...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 21:08:06 EDT --- I don't known if it's necessrary, what's the opinion of FPC? Bundling sources(normorlly BSD or MIT license) in GPL+ applications is quite common and is permitted in fedora, it may be impossible for all packages to split out their bundled sources. e.g. Many Input methods bundles IMdkit. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841
--- Comment #14 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2010-05-26
21:54:16 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Any update on this package review?
You still need to fix most of these rpmlint errors.
[le...@localhost Desktop]$ rpmlint
/home/leigh/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/wicd-1.7.0-1.fc13.x86_64.rpm
wicd.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency dbus-glib
wicd.x86_64: E: no-binary
wicd.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
wicd.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings.
[le...@localhost Desktop]$ rpmlint
/home/leigh/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/wicd-common-1.7.0-1.fc13.noarch.rpm
wicd-common.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontend -
fronted, front end, front-end
wicd-common.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/acpi/suspend.d/50-wicd-suspend.sh
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/cli/wicd-cli.py
0644L /usr/bin/python
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/daemon/wicd-daemon.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/backends/be-external.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/backends/be-ioctl.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/wicd/logfile.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
wicd-common.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/wicd/logfile.py
wicd-common.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/acpi/resume.d/80-wicd-connect.sh
wicd-common.noarch: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/wicd
wicd-common.noarch: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-postin
/etc/rc.d/init.d/wicd
wicd-common.noarch: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-preun
/etc/rc.d/init.d/wicd
wicd-common.noarch: W: incoherent-init-script-name wicd ('wicd-common',
'wicd-commond')
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 10 errors, 3 warnings.
[le...@localhost Desktop]$ rpmlint
/home/leigh/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/wicd-curses-1.7.0-1.fc13.noarch.rpm
wicd-curses.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/curses/curses_misc.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-curses.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/curses/netentry_curses.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-curses.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/curses/prefs_curses.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 0 warnings.
[le...@localhost Desktop]$ rpmlint
/home/leigh/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/wicd-gtk-1.7.0-1.fc13.noarch.rpm
wicd-gtk.noarch: W: no-documentation
wicd-gtk.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/gtk/prefs.py 0644L
/usr/bin/python
wicd-gtk.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/xdg/autostart/wicd-tray.desktop
wicd-gtk.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/gtk/wicd-client.py
0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-gtk.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/gtk/gui.py 0644L
/usr/bin/python
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 2 warnings.
[le...@localhost Desktop]$
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 595697] Review Request - ghc-regex-tdfa - Haskell tagged DFA regex 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=595697 --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 22:42:40 EDT --- BTW do you have some package in mind that needs this library? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841 --- Comment #15 from Brian C. Lane b...@redhat.com 2010-05-26 23:14:35 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=417101) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=417101) Fix --share --share needs to point to the wicd share, otherwise the helper scripts like /usr/bin/wicd-cli point to the wrong location. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592655] yelp-xsl XSL stylesheets for use with yelp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592655 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||panem...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 23:20:46 EDT --- As per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Timestamps, you should use following make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL=install -p -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841 Brian C. Lane b...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #417101|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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449 Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||supercyp...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-05-26 23:56:06 EDT --- Why not to upload SPEC and SRPM to some pulic space? e.g. fedorapeople dropbox See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/fedorapeople.org -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596449] Review Request: NetworkManager-openswan - NetworkManager VPN plugin for Openswan (IPsec)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596449
--- Comment #9 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-05-27 00:04:40 EDT ---
It'll be better to change %define snapshot .git20100411 to %define snapshot
.20100411git or .%{gitdate}git%{githash}.
The naming style for the NetworkManger seems a little different compared to
other packages in fedora.
See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841
--- Comment #16 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2010-05-27 00:16:47
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #14)
wicd.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency dbus-glib
Fixed.
wicd.x86_64: E: no-binary
wicd.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
This can't change as the only arch-dependent component of wicd at the moment is
the pm-utils script. And since the pm-utils package is arch-dependent, this
package has to be.
wicd.x86_64: W: no-documentation
Fixed.
[le...@localhost Desktop]$ rpmlint
/home/leigh/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/wicd-common-1.7.0-1.fc13.noarch.rpm
wicd-common.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontend -
fronted, front end, front-end
Fixed.
wicd-common.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/acpi/suspend.d/50-wicd-suspend.sh
Fixed.
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/cli/wicd-cli.py
0644L /usr/bin/python
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/daemon/wicd-daemon.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/backends/be-external.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/backends/be-ioctl.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-common.noarch: E: non-executable-script
Fixed.
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/wicd/logfile.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
wicd-common.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
Fixed.
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/wicd/logfile.py
wicd-common.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/acpi/resume.d/80-wicd-connect.sh
Fixed.
wicd-common.noarch: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/wicd
Fixed, but now rpmlint complains because the logrotate file is
/etc/logrotate.d/wicd instead of /etc/logrotate.d/wicd-common. Given that the
service name is 'wicd' and the log file will be /var/log/wicd.log, I figured
this is a better logrotate file name than wicd-common. I could move the
logrotate component to the wicd package to suppress this message, let me know.
wicd-common.noarch: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-postin
/etc/rc.d/init.d/wicd
wicd-common.noarch: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-preun
/etc/rc.d/init.d/wicd
Fixed.
wicd-common.noarch: W: incoherent-init-script-name wicd ('wicd-common',
'wicd-commond')
This one should be ignored as the service name is wicd, but since it's in the
group of noarch files, I put it in the wicd-common package. I could move it to
the wicd package, but then it would sit alone without the rest of the Python
code. I suppose I don't mind either way, just let me know.
wicd-curses.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/curses/curses_misc.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-curses.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/curses/netentry_curses.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-curses.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/wicd/curses/prefs_curses.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
Fixed.
/home/leigh/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/wicd-gtk-1.7.0-1.fc13.noarch.rpm
wicd-gtk.noarch: W: no-documentation
The documentation is in the main wicd package.
wicd-gtk.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/gtk/prefs.py 0644L
/usr/bin/python
Fixed.
wicd-gtk.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/xdg/autostart/wicd-tray.desktop
I think this is ok. NetworkManager's spec file lists:
%{_sysconfdir}/xdg/autostart/nm-applet.desktop
If I need to mark it as a config file, let me know.
wicd-gtk.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/gtk/wicd-client.py
0644L /usr/bin/env
wicd-gtk.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/wicd/gtk/gui.py 0644L
/usr/bin/python
Fixed.
Thanks for the review feedback! New spec and srpm:
http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/wicd/wicd.spec
http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/wicd/wicd-1.7.0-1.fc13.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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 579635] Review Request: ibus-table-xingyin - The structural and phonetic tables for IBus-Table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579635 Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2010-05-27 00:39:43 EDT --- Decided to be obsoleted by bug#596593. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 596593 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 579613] Review Request: ibus-table-cangcan - Cang Jie, Cantonese, and derived tables for IBus-Table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579613 Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2010-05-27 00:40:06 EDT --- Decided to be obsoleted by bug#596593. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 596593 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596593] New: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596593 Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ccha...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://kaio.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/ibus-table-chinese.spec SRPM URL: http://kaio.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/ibus-table-chinese-1.3.0.20100527-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: Chinese tables for IBus-Table -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596593] Review Request: main package name here - short summary here
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596593 Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||i18n -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596593] Review Request: ibus-table-chinese - Chinese tables for IBus-Table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596593 --- Comment #2 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2010-05-27 00:40:06 EDT --- *** Bug 579613 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596593] Review Request: ibus-table-chinese - Chinese tables for IBus-Table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596593 --- Comment #1 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2010-05-27 00:39:43 EDT --- *** Bug 579635 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
