[Bug 479800] Review Request: hlint - Provides Haskell Source Code Suggestions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479800 --- Comment #54 from Conrad Meyer 2010-06-24 02:45:25 EDT --- Done! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 601585] Review Request: perl-mime-construct - Construct/send MIME messages from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=601585 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-24 02:43:08 EDT --- perl-mime-construct-1.10-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-mime-construct-1.10-2.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 479800] Review Request: hlint - Provides Haskell Source Code Suggestions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479800 --- Comment #53 from Jens Petersen 2010-06-24 02:41:59 EDT --- Are we going to push the F13 build to Bodhi? -- Configure 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 459874] Review Request: zeromq - Fast messaging system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459874 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542767] Review Request: ghemical - Molecular mechanics and quantum mechanics frontend for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542767 --- Comment #9 from Carl Byington 2010-06-24 01:12:33 EDT --- Oops, failed to move them from the staging server to the real server. Fixed now. http://www.five-ten-sg.com/ghemical.spec http://www.five-ten-sg.com/ghemical-2.99.2-13.fc12.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2264194 -- Configure 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 607342] Review Request: python-markupsafe - A safe escaping library for markup languages like HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607342
Jason Tibbitts changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ti...@math.uh.edu
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-06-24 01:06:01 EDT
---
A couple of quick comments; I'll do a full review once the package builds.
The spec looks as clean as can be for something that supports python 2 and 3 as
well as F12 and EPEL. However, some additional conditionals are needed for the
first two lines as python3 isn't available on F12 or EPEL and F13 doesn't need
the python_site* define. (F13 also doesn't need %clean, the BuildRoot line or
the buildroot cleaning in %install, but it's pointless to conditionalize
those.)
So:
%if 0%{?fedora} > 12 || 0%{?rhel} > 6
%global with_python3 1
%else
%{!?python_sitelib: %global python_sitelib %(%{__python} -c "from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print (get_python_lib())")}
%endif
(probably horribly wordwrapped) and things are good. Also, I suspect this will
have problems on F12 anyway as its arch-specific so you probably want the
python_sitearch define there instead of sitelib, especially since sitearch is
used in %files.
Unfortunately this fails to build for me in rawhide; setyp.py won't run because
setuptools is not installed. A scratch build is at
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2269296
--
Configure 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 537640] Review Request: pdfmod - A simple application for modifying PDF documents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537640 --- Comment #11 from Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz 2010-06-23 22:47:26 EDT --- I opened new request https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607405 for packaging poppler-sharp required for pdfmod. Later I will modify pdfmod.spec for ask this dependency. For pdfsharp is most complicated because no have makefile and I need compiling from scratch. Please review the poppler-sharp. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607405] Review Request: poppler-sharp - C Sharp Bindings for Poppler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607405 Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||537640 -- Configure 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 537640] Review Request: pdfmod - A simple application for modifying PDF documents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537640 Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||607405 -- Configure 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 607405] Review Request: poppler-sharp - C Sharp Bindings for Poppler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607405 Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-package-rev...@redha ||t.com, nott...@redhat.com Component|0x |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 549590] Review Request: php-pChart - A PHP class to build charts.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549590
--- Comment #7 from David Nalley 2010-06-23 22:05:33 EDT ---
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
[ke4...@nalleyx60 SPECS]$ rpmlint php-pChart.spec
php-pChart.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: pChart.tar.gz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[ke4...@nalleyx60 SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/php-pChart-1.27d-3.fc13.src.rpm
../RPMS/noarch/php-pChart-1.27d-3.fc13.noarch.rpm
php-pChart.src: W: invalid-url Source0: pChart.tar.gz
php-pChart.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
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.
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
CHECK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
While the php code is under a license that's acceptable I am not sure about the
fonts.
FIX: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
Source code indicates the following:
This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 1,2,3 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
Which would be GPL+ instead of GPLv2+
NA: 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: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
FIX: 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.
I know what you did (repackaged as a tarball from the rar) but you need to tell
us how to recreate what you did so we can compare sources
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code
While that isn't exactly the situation here - it's pretty close.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
NA: 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: 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.
NA: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
NA: 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.
FIX: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
I am saying fix here because it bundles fonts.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29
NA: 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: 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 have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
NA: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of
large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly
if it is not present.
NA: Header
[Bug 605373] Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic Information System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=605373 --- Comment #3 from Volker Fröhlich 2010-06-23 21:32:31 EDT --- Updated upon comments: Spec URL: http://geofrogger.net/qgis_review/qgis.spec SRPM URL: http://geofrogger.net/qgis_review/qgis-1.4.0-2.fc12.src.rpm The old spec file is located here: Spec URL: http://geofrogger.net/qgis_review/qgis-1.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 607385] Review Request: felix-osgi-foundation - OSGi Foundation Execution Environment (EE) Classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607385 Victor G. Vasilyev changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||607389 -- Configure 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 607389] Review Request: felix-osgi-compendium - Felix OSGi R4 Compendium Bundle
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607389 Victor G. Vasilyev changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||607385 -- Configure 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 607389] New: Review Request: felix-osgi-compendium - Felix OSGi R4 Compendium Bundle
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: felix-osgi-compendium - Felix OSGi R4 Compendium Bundle https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607389 Summary: Review Request: felix-osgi-compendium - Felix OSGi R4 Compendium Bundle Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: victor.vasil...@sun.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://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/felix-osgi-compendium.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/felix-osgi-compendium-1.4.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: OSGi Service Platform Release 4 Compendium Interfaces and Classes. Note, the NetBeans 6.9 [1] depends on this package. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NetBeans_6.9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607385] Review Request: felix-osgi-foundation - OSGi Foundation Execution Environment (EE) Classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607385 --- Comment #1 from Victor G. Vasilyev 2010-06-23 20:51:08 EDT --- Successful scratch koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2269177 -- Configure 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 607385] New: Review Request: felix-osgi-foundation - OSGi Foundation Execution Environment (EE) Classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: felix-osgi-foundation - OSGi Foundation Execution Environment (EE) Classes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607385 Summary: Review Request: felix-osgi-foundation - OSGi Foundation Execution Environment (EE) Classes Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: victor.vasil...@sun.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://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/felix-osgi-foundation.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/felix-osgi-foundation-1.2.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: OSGi Foundation Execution Environment (EE) Classes. Note, the NetBeans 6.9 [1] depends on this package. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NetBeans_6.9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542767] Review Request: ghemical - Molecular mechanics and quantum mechanics frontend for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542767 --- Comment #8 from Christian Krause 2010-06-23 19:35:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > http://www.five-ten-sg.com/ghemical.spec > http://www.five-ten-sg.com/ghemical-2.99.2-13.fc12.src.rpm > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2264194 These files are identical to the previous one: ghemical.spec still has release 12 and when I try to download the 2nd link I still get ghemical-2.99.2-12.fc12.src.rpm. Please can you check, whether the files are correctly uploaded? -- Configure 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|erlang-mochiweb-1.3-0.2.201 |erlang-mochiweb-1.3-0.3.201 |00507svn159.fc12|00507svn159.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 18:12:17 EDT --- erlang-mochiweb-1.3-0.3.20100507svn159.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 550690] Review Request: libsurl - A library for generating shortened URLs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550690 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 18:21:01 EDT --- libsurl-0.7.1-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libsurl-0.7.1-2.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 550690] Review Request: libsurl - A library for generating shortened URLs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550690 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 18:21:08 EDT --- libsurl-0.7.1-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libsurl-0.7.1-2.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 604653] Review Request: perl-Test-NoTabs - Check the presence of tabs in your project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604653 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 18:10:50 EDT --- perl-Test-NoTabs-1.0-3.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 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 perl-Test-NoTabs'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-NoTabs-1.0-3.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604093] Review Request: perl-Test-Synopsis - Test your SYNOPSIS code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604093 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 18:09:26 EDT --- perl-Test-Synopsis-0.06-4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 perl-Test-Synopsis'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-Synopsis-0.06-4.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604653] Review Request: perl-Test-NoTabs - Check the presence of tabs in your project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604653 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 18:08:52 EDT --- perl-Test-NoTabs-1.0-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 perl-Test-NoTabs'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-NoTabs-1.0-3.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607355] New: Review Request: perl-Directory-Queue - Object oriented interface to a directory based queue
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Directory-Queue - Object oriented interface to a directory based queue https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607355 Summary: Review Request: perl-Directory-Queue - Object oriented interface to a directory based queue Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: steve.tray...@cern.ch QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/perl-Directory-Queue/perl-Directory-Queue.spec SRPM URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/perl-Directory-Queue/perl-Directory-Queue-0.5-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: Object oriented interface to a directory based queue The goal of this module is to offer a simple queue system using the underlying file system for storage, security and to prevent race conditions via atomic operations. It focuses on simplicity, robustness and scalability. -- Configure 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 606019] Review Request: python-distribute - Distribute is a drop-in replacement for Setuptools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606019 --- Comment #6 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi 2010-06-23 17:37:40 EDT --- We'd want this review if we want to rename python-setuptools to python-distribute. -- Configure 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 600467] Review Request: jags - Just Another Gibbs Sampler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600467 --- Comment #17 from chris desjardins 2010-06-23 17:02:35 EDT --- I have addressed all of the outstanding comments (#12 and #16) in the latest version. SPEC URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1501309/Fedora/JAGS/JAGS.spec Source URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1501309/Fedora/JAGS/JAGS-2.1.0-6.fc13.src.rpm I have patched configure.ac and Makefile.am as per Martin's requests. Also, I removed ChangeLog as it is empty. The binary installs fine and works. -- Configure 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 606288] Review Request: bfast - Blat-like Fast Accurate Search Tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606288 Adam Huffman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Adam Huffman 2010-06-23 16:57:51 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: bfast Short Description: Blat-like Fast Accurate Search Tool Owners: verdurin Branches: F-12 F-13 EL-5 EL-6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607342] New: Review Request: python-markupsafe - A safe escaping library for markup languages like HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-markupsafe - A safe escaping library for markup languages like HTML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607342 Summary: Review Request: python-markupsafe - A safe escaping library for markup languages like HTML Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ky...@kylev.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.kylev.com/tmp/python-markupsafe.spec SRPM URL: http://www.kylev.com/tmp/python-markupsafe-0.9.2-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: This is actually a new dependency for python-mako as of version 0.3.4 (which is a security fix release). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607342] Review Request: python-markupsafe - A safe escaping library for markup languages like HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607342 Kyle VanderBeek changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||607302 -- Configure 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 606666] Review Request: sselp - Prints X selection to standard out
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=60 --- Comment #4 from Mohamed El Morabity 2010-06-23 16:15:37 EDT --- Great :) I see no more issues... unless my suggestions can be improved ^^. Since this package has already a reviewer, I yield my place... But I stay tuned ;) -- Configure 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 585598] Review Request: python26-PyXML - XML libraries 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=585598 Bug 585598 depends on bug 574506, which changed state. Bug 574506 Summary: Review Request: python26-distribute - the "Distribute" fork of setuptools for the python26 EPEL5 package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=574506 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA --- Comment #1 from Steve Traylen 2010-06-23 16:16:32 EDT --- > I wanted to check, the result: > $ rpm -pq --provides ../RPMS/x86_64/python26-PyXML-0.8.4-21.el5.x86_64.rpm > boolean.so()(64bit) > pyexpat.so()(64bit) > sgmlop.so()(64bit) > > Is that okay or I need to remove these? To answer my own question, this is fine and perfectly normal. Steve. -- Configure 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 606288] Review Request: bfast - Blat-like Fast Accurate Search Tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606288
Mohamed El Morabity changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Mohamed El Morabity 2010-06-23
16:10:41 EDT ---
That looks fine :)
Here is the review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606288
Hi,
Here is a review of bfast:
* MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
No serious issues on the binary and debug packages (only warnings about man
pages not provided upstream and false-positive mispellings)
* 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 (GPLv2 and MIT)
* MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK
* MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
OK
* MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK
* MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK
* MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK (RPM source archive has the same MD5 sum than the one downloaded:
a1443f8b0c5d1169f1b88730bdd29d95)
* MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK (tested on koji, OK on F13 and rawhide :
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2268883)
* 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.
N/A
* 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.
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.
N/A
* 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.
N/A
* 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.
OK
* MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK
* MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK
* MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
* MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
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 left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
N/A
* MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
OK
* MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A
* MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A
* MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
N/A
* MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix
[Bug 503013] Review Request: gnaughty - Downloader for adult content
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503013 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529256] Review Request: i3status - Generates a status line for dzen2 or wmii
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529256 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 582369] Review Request: perl-AnyEvent-I3 - Communicate with the i3 window 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=582369 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529255] Review Request: i3lock - A slightly improved version of slock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529255 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 528290] Review Request: yapet - Curses based password encryption tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528290 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529253] Review Request: dmenu - Generic menu for X
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529253 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529254] Review Request: i3 - Improved tiling window 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=529254 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 454208] Review Request: florence - Florence is an extensible scalable on-screen virtual keyboard for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454208 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 583142] Review Request: i3-ipc - Inter-process communication with i3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=583142 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 492259] Review Request: tucan - Manager for downloads and uploads at hosting sites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492259 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603904] Review Request: xautomation - Tools to automate tasks in X, even detecting on screen images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603904 Mohamed El Morabity changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Mohamed El Morabity 2010-06-23 15:41:55 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: xautomation Short Description: Tools to automate tasks in X, even detecting on screen images Owners: melmorabity Branches: F-12 F-13 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603904] Review Request: xautomation - Tools to automate tasks in X, even detecting on screen images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603904 --- Comment #4 from Mohamed El Morabity 2010-06-23 15:38:46 EDT --- Thanks for the review :) I've just corrected the "true-positive" mispelling on "progams": http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/xautomation/xautomation.spec http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/xautomation/xautomation-1.03-2.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 606759] Review Request: nvi - 4.4BSD re-implementation of vi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606759 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(mc...@redhat.com) | --- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2010-06-23 15:36:52 EDT --- Using the stand-alone spec, as it uses better filesystem macros #+TODO: TODO(t) WAIT(w@/!) FAIL(f@) | DONE(d) N/A(n) * TODO Review [70%] ** DONE Names [2/2] *** DONE Package name *** DONE Spec name ** DONE Meets [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines][guidelines]] ** DONE source files match upstream 88d1e23115ee9f2961186b62e55f5704 nvi-1.81.6.tar.bz2 88d1e23115ee9f2961186b62e55f5704 /home/michel/rpmbuild/SOURCES/nvi-1.81.6.tar.bz2 ** DONE License [3/3] *** DONE License is Fedora-approved *** DONE License field accurate *** DONE License included iff packaged by upstream ** TODO rpmlint [0/2] *** FAIL on src.rpm - State "FAIL" from "" [2010-06-23 Wed 21:04] \\ nvi.src:81: W: macro-in-comment %patch27 (when commenting out, I normally just replace % with # to avoid this) nvi.src:4: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 4) (if using Emacs, C-x h M-x untabify would fix this) nvi.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch27: nvi-28-regex_widechar.patch *** FAIL on x86_64.rpm - State "FAIL" from "TODO" [2010-06-23 Wed 21:30] \\ nvi.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/share/nvi/recover 0555L ** DONE Language & locale [3/3] *** DONE Spec in US English *** DONE Spec legible *** N/A Use %find_lang to handle locale files ** DONE Build [3/3] *** DONE Koji results http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2268677 *** DONE BRs complete *** DONE Directory ownership ** TODO Spec inspection [8/9] *** DONE No duplicate files *** FAIL File permissions - State "FAIL" from "TODO" [2010-06-23 Wed 21:32] \\ See rpmlint result *** DONE Filenames must be UTF-8 *** DONE Has %clean section (except F-13+: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean) *** DONE %buildroot cleaned on %install *** DONE Macro usage consistent *** DONE Documentation [2/2] N/A If large docs, separate -doc DONE %doc files are non-essential -- Configure 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 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224 Severin Gehwolf changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Severin Gehwolf 2010-06-23 15:33:43 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: eclipse-fedorapackager Short Description: Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure Owners: jerboaa Branches: F-13 InitialCC: jerboaa -- Configure 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 582369] Review Request: perl-AnyEvent-I3 - Communicate with the i3 window 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=582369 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529253] Review Request: dmenu - Generic menu for X
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529253 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 454208] Review Request: florence - Florence is an extensible scalable on-screen virtual keyboard for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454208 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 528290] Review Request: yapet - Curses based password encryption tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528290 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 583142] Review Request: i3-ipc - Inter-process communication with i3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=583142 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529255] Review Request: i3lock - A slightly improved version of slock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529255 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 503013] Review Request: gnaughty - Downloader for adult content
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503013 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529256] Review Request: i3status - Generates a status line for dzen2 or wmii
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529256 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529254] Review Request: i3 - Improved tiling window 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=529254 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 492259] Review Request: tucan - Manager for downloads and uploads at hosting sites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492259 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #8 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-06-23 15:17:47 EDT --- Lifting FE-NEEDSPONSOR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224 --- Comment #6 from Severin Gehwolf 2010-06-23 15:16:16 EDT --- My bad. Updated changelog and Release. SPEC: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~sgehwolf/fedora/rpm-work/eclipse-fedorapackager.spec SRPM: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~sgehwolf/fedora/rpm-work/eclipse-fedorapackager-0.0.3-2.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 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-06-23 15:17:21 EDT --- Thanks, 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 600467] Review Request: jags - Just Another Gibbs Sampler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600467 --- Comment #16 from Martin Gieseking 2010-06-23 15:11:20 EDT --- I haven't had a deeper look into the tarball and the autotools scripts, but you can probably do it this way: - add BuildRequires: libtool-ltdl-devel autoconf automake - in %prep: * remove the libltdl directory * remove all references to this directory from configure.ac and Makefile.am by patching these files accordingly (don't modify the files in the tarball but add .patch/.diff files describing the changes to your package) * run 'autoreconf' This is just the general idea. I haven't tried it, so there might be further things to be addressed. -- Configure 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 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-06-23 14:59:26 EDT --- When you change the spec you have to bump the Release and add a changelog entry describing what you have changed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224 --- Comment #4 from Severin Gehwolf 2010-06-23 14:51:43 EDT --- > FIXIT: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, > as > provided in the spec URL. There are both download instructions and fetch shell > script please clarify which one is used and remove the other. I've updated the spec file to include the command sequence as to how the source tarball has been produced. It's a tarball containing revision 7131f3988117c916c04602a78928c7aee5213900 of git://git.fedorahosted.org/eclipse-fedorapackager.git. Generation of the tarball should be reproducible now. Other source references have been removed. > Other comments: > * please remove the -v -D parameters from the pdebuild call, they are not > really needed and make the output so unreadable Fixed. Totally forgot about removing those. For reference SPEC: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~sgehwolf/fedora/rpm-work/eclipse-fedorapackager.spec SRPM: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~sgehwolf/fedora/rpm-work/eclipse-fedorapackager-0.0.3-1.fc13.src.rpm Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 554243] Review Request: moovida - Media Center
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554243 --- Comment #28 from Alex Lancaster 2010-06-23 14:39:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #27) > where are moovida packages for fedora 13 ? , since "elisa is obsoleted by > moovida" Unfortunately moovida's replacement hasn't yet passed review (see above comments). Graeme: are you still interested in this package? Have you had a chance to look into the error that Peter identified in comment #26, above? -- Configure 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 600467] Review Request: jags - Just Another Gibbs Sampler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600467 --- Comment #15 from chris desjardins 2010-06-23 14:38:25 EDT --- Hi Martin, Thanks for your speedy reply. Do you know how I would do this? > - The tarball contains a copy of libltdl which should be removed in favor > of the package provided by Fedora (libtool-ltdl-devel). In the .spec file? I am unclear how to do this. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592645] Review Request: mkgmap - Convert OpenStreetMap data for Garmin GPSes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592645 chris desjardins changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cddesjard...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from chris desjardins 2010-06-23 14:36:42 EDT --- Hi Bruce, I just took a quick look. I wonder if you want to update to the latest svn? Also, I wonder if you want to add the ChangeLog to %doc? I am happy to review the package further but I am unable to sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 600467] Review Request: jags - Just Another Gibbs Sampler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600467 --- Comment #14 from Martin Gieseking 2010-06-23 14:27:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) > AI am not entirely sure that removing the *.la files is correct and I have > contacted the upstream author to verify this doesn't cripple the program. (It > doesn't appear to). Removing the libtool archives isn't harmful at all. They are only used when linking a library with libtool. Alternatively, you could also explicitly link against the corresponding .a or .so files. Once the binary is built, the .la files are not required any longer, especially since Fedora primarily distributes shared libs which are linked via .so files. And the latter are part of the devel package. > I would like to maintain several R packages in Fedora beyond these (including > R-lme4 and R-MCMCglmm) but wanted to focus on these 3 first. Should I offer > more packages too? OK, that's fine. As far as I know, three packages should be enough, but this decision is up to your sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 606759] Review Request: nvi - 4.4BSD re-implementation of vi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606759 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|michael.silva...@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 606759] Review Request: nvi - 4.4BSD re-implementation of vi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606759
Michel Alexandre Salim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||michael.silva...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review?,
||needinfo?(mc...@redhat.com)
--- Comment #1 from Michel Alexandre Salim
2010-06-23 14:26:59 EDT ---
Reviewing this. Question: which nvi.spec is correct? The one you linked to is
newer than the one in the SRPM, and there are some differences:
$ diff -u nvi.spec ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/
--- nvi.spec 2010-06-22 14:29:33.0 +0200
+++ /home/michel/rpmbuild/SPECS/nvi.spec 2010-06-22 14:11:45.0 +0200
@@ -88,14 +88,14 @@
vi_cv_revoke=no \
../dist/configure \
--disable-curses \
- --prefix=%{_prefix} \
+ --prefix=/usr \
--disable-shared --enable-static \
--enable-widechar \
--disable-threads \
--without-x \
--with-gnu-ld=yes \
- --datadir='%{_datadir}' \
- --mandir='%{_mandir}' \
+ --datadir='$${prefix}/share' \
+ --mandir='$${prefix}/share/man' \
--program-prefix=n
)
sed -i -e '/define.*_PATH_MSGCAT/ s/".*"/"\/usr\/share\/vi\/catalog\/"/' \
--
Configure 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 603904] Review Request: xautomation - Tools to automate tasks in X, even detecting on screen images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603904
MERCIER Jonathan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from MERCIER Jonathan 2010-06-23
14:23:45 EDT ---
ok your package is good:
in comment #1 is said a bad think, you use only one style for $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
instead macro %{buildroot} is good
--
Configure 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 600638] Review Request: seed - GNOME JavaScript interpreter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600638 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 14:15:59 EDT --- seed-2.30.0-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/seed-2.30.0-2.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 542416] Review Request: yagtd - Yet Another Getting Things Done
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542416 chris desjardins changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cddesjard...@gmail.com --- Comment #5 from chris desjardins 2010-06-23 14:08:56 EDT --- Is there an update on this? I see here -> http://download.gna.org/yagtd/ that there is a version 0.3.3 released. The spec file (Version and %changelog) should be updated to reflect this. While I can't sponsor you, I am happy to review this once I can tell you are still working on this. Thanks! Chris -- Configure 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 600467] Review Request: jags - Just Another Gibbs Sampler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600467 --- Comment #13 from chris desjardins 2010-06-23 13:53:03 EDT --- Thanks. I will update the package once I get the libltdl situation figured out. AI am not entirely sure that removing the *.la files is correct and I have contacted the upstream author to verify this doesn't cripple the program. (It doesn't appear to). Also, I wanted to mention I am seeking sponsorship for these packages as well: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600529 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600517 I would like to maintain several R packages in Fedora beyond these (including R-lme4 and R-MCMCglmm) but wanted to focus on these 3 first. Should I offer more packages too? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 589482] Review Request: perl-IO-Compress-Lzma - Read and write lzma compressed data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=589482 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-IO-Compress-Lzma-2.027 ||-2.fc13 Resolution||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 508351] Review Request: josm - java openstreetmap 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=508351 --- Comment #72 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:51:13 EDT --- josm-0-0.8.3329svn.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 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 josm'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/josm-0-0.8.3329svn.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 592668] Review Request: ladspa-autotalent-plugins - A pitch correction LADSPA 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=592668 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ladspa-autotalent-plugins-0 |ladspa-autotalent-plugins-0 |.2-3.fc12 |.2-3.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 592668] Review Request: ladspa-autotalent-plugins - A pitch correction LADSPA 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=592668 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:52:45 EDT --- ladspa-autotalent-plugins-0.2-3.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 589482] Review Request: perl-IO-Compress-Lzma - Read and write lzma compressed data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=589482 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:51:00 EDT --- perl-IO-Compress-Lzma-2.027-2.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 592668] Review Request: ladspa-autotalent-plugins - A pitch correction LADSPA 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=592668 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ladspa-autotalent-plugins-0 ||.2-3.fc12 Resolution||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 524423] Review Request: ciso - iso to cso converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524423 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||ciso-1.0.0-3.fc13 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 592668] Review Request: ladspa-autotalent-plugins - A pitch correction LADSPA 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=592668 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:45:38 EDT --- ladspa-autotalent-plugins-0.2-3.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 524423] Review Request: ciso - iso to cso converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524423 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ciso-1.0.0-3.fc13 |ciso-1.0.0-3.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 524423] Review Request: ciso - iso to cso converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524423 --- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:45:21 EDT --- ciso-1.0.0-3.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 524423] Review Request: ciso - iso to cso converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524423 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:46:03 EDT --- ciso-1.0.0-3.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 600637] Review Request: gnome-js-common - Common modules for GNOME JavaScript interpreters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600637 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||gnome-js-common-0.1.2-3.fc1 ||3 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 554243] Review Request: moovida - Media Center
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554243 Sergio Monteiro Basto changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ser...@sergiomb.no-ip.org --- Comment #27 from Sergio Monteiro Basto 2010-06-23 13:42:32 EDT --- where are moovida packages for fedora 13 ? , since "elisa is obsoleted by moovida" -- Configure 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 600637] Review Request: gnome-js-common - Common modules for GNOME JavaScript interpreters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600637 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:42:20 EDT --- gnome-js-common-0.1.2-3.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 508351] Review Request: josm - java openstreetmap 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=508351 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #71 from Fedora Update System 2010-06-23 13:39:09 EDT --- josm-0-0.8.3329svn.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 josm'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/josm-0-0.8.3329svn.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 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 #14 from Felix Schwarz 2010-06-23 13:38:51 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=426326) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=426326) 0.2-1.1 - modified spec file that builds in mock I don't want to interfere here but I needed this package so I adapted the spec file and fixed some of the issues mentioned above. Maybe it's useful to some. At least it builds in mock now. KWallet is disabled as I didn't have time to get the correct build requires. -- Configure 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 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-06-23
12:26:27 EDT ---
Review:
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review. Output in comment 1 is ok. These dangling-symlinks looks like false
positives to me.
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: 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: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
FIXIT: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. There are both download instructions and fetch shell
script please clarify which one is used and remove the other.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: 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: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]
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: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application.
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Other comments:
* please remove the -v -D parameters from the pdebuild call, they are not
really needed and make the output so unreadable
--
Configure 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 603904] Review Request: xautomation - Tools to automate tasks in X, even detecting on screen images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603904 --- Comment #2 from MERCIER Jonathan 2010-06-23 12:38:56 EDT --- For koji and scratch rebuild is ok for ppc,i386,x86_64: F-12 --> koji build --scratch dist-f12 /xautomation-1.03-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2268436 F-13 --> koji build --scratch dist-f13 xautomation-1.03-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2268443 -- Configure 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 570424] Review Request: transmission-remote-cli - A console client for the Transmission BitTorrent 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=570424 --- Comment #17 from Satya Komaragiri 2010-06-23 12:47:01 EDT --- Added version 6.5 (the latest upstream to devel branch. -- Configure 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 607079] Review Request: perl-Template-Plugin-Cycle - Cyclically insert into a Template from a sequence of values
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607079 --- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell 2010-06-23 12:12:47 EDT --- 1, 2, and 3 are fixed. But 4 really looks like "GPL+ or Artistic" - even though it includes the text of GPLv2, the very top of LICENSE file states quite clearly Terms of Perl itself a) the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 1, or (at your option) any later version, or b) the "Artistic License" and Cycle.pm states that is indeed under the same terms as Perl itself. New SPEC: http://iarnell.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Template-Plugin-Cycle.spec New SRPM: http://iarnell.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Template-Plugin-Cycle-1.06-2.fc14.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 600467] Review Request: jags - Just Another Gibbs Sampler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600467
--- Comment #12 from Martin Gieseking 2010-06-23
12:04:49 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Thank you very much for reviewing this package! I am really excited about
> hopefully getting this package into Fedora.
Hi Chris,
I'm not a sponsor, so I can't formally review this package. Nonetheless,
polishing the spec file will certainly help to find one. In addition, you
usually need to offer some more packages and comment on other packager's review
requests to show that you're familiar with the packaging guidelines.
Here are a couple of further remarks on your package:
- In Source0, replace JAGS-2.1.0.tar.gz with JAGS-%{version}.tar.gz or
%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz. It simplifies future updates of the package
- I think, you can also add %{_smp_mflags} to "make docs". It enables
parallel builds if possible, and thus speeds up the build process on
multi-processor systems.
- remove the trailing slash from %{_bindir}/jags/ because jags is not
a directory here but a binary file
- you can drop jags_installation_manual.pdf as it's not of much use in
a binary package
- also adapt the %defattr parameters of the devel package as mentioned
in comment #10
- The tarball contains a copy of libltdl which should be removed in favor
of the package provided by Fedora (libtool-ltdl-devel).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603904] Review Request: xautomation - Tools to automate tasks in X, even detecting on screen images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603904
MERCIER Jonathan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bioinfornat...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from MERCIER Jonathan 2010-06-23
12:00:52 EDT ---
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
_
spec file:
$ rpmlint -i xautomation.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
_
src.rpm file:
$ rpmlint -i ../SRPMS/xautomation-1.03-1.fc13.src.rpm
xautomation.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xse -> sex, use, XS
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
xautomation.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US visgrep -> visage,
viscera, visited
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
xautomation.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US progams -> programs,
program, phanerogams
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
_
rpm file:
$ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/x86_64/xautomation-*.rpm
xautomation.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xse -> sex, use, XS
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
xautomation.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US progams ->
programs, program, phanerogams
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
2 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: GPLv2+ OK
===
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license:
OK
===
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc: they are COPYING file and it is in %doc
===
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English: OK
===
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible: OK
===
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this: md5sum is same OK
===
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture: compile and build 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 : NA
===
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 : minimum
build environment OK
===
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden: NA
===
MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun: no shar
[Bug 600835] Review Request: modplugtools - Command line mod music players
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600835 Ville Skyttä changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||0.5.0-2 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #6 from Ville Skyttä 2010-06-23 11:55:03 EDT --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2268248 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2268323 -- Configure 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 607075] Review Request: perl-Test-utf8 - Handy utf8 tests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607075 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607224] Review Request: eclipse-fedorapackager - Eclipse plug-in which helps to interact with Fedora infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607224 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-06-23 11:36:40 EDT --- I'll take this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607078] Review Request: perl-File-Type-WebImages - Determine web image file types using magic
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607078 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
