[Bug 624345] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru - Porter's stemming algorithm for Russian (KOI8-R only)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624345 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-08-22 05:24:22 EDT --- Taking. -- Configure 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 624345] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru - Porter's stemming algorithm for Russian (KOI8-R only)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624345
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman
2010-08-22 05:41:58 EDT ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416784
[x] Rpmlint output:
perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru.src: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru.spec: W: no-%clean-section
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
No buildroot defined, default is used
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
b7b82495cc9f0b466b1b3cba0fd779a6 Lingua-Stem-Ru-0.01.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416784
[!] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
49683 tests performed, 0 failed, 49683 successfull
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 624458] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Snowball-Da - Porter's stemming algorithm for Danish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624458 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-08-22 05:46:16 EDT --- Taking. -- Configure 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 624458] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Snowball-Da - Porter's stemming algorithm for Danish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624458
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman
2010-08-22 05:57:17 EDT ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416842
[x] Rpmlint output: FIXME
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
No buildroot defined, default is used
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPLv2
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
e8d9a8285bce0c9e4bedc138cd6a1501 Lingua-Stem-Snowball-Da-1.01.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[!] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
ok 1
Testing stemmer against database, this will take some time
ok 2
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 624459] Review Request: perl-Text-German - German grundform reduction
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624459 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-08-22 06:15:04 EDT --- Taking. -- Configure 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 624459] Review Request: perl-Text-German - German grundform reduction
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624459
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman
2010-08-22 06:29:08 EDT ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416854
[x] Rpmlint output:
perl-Text-German.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) grundform ->
Grundyism, landform, Grundy
perl-Text-German.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) grundform -> Grundyism,
landform, Grundy
perl-Text-German.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Text-German.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Text-German.src: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Text-German.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Text-German.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Text-German.spec: W: no-%clean-section
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
No buildroot defined, default is used
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
9e968525f7385c80d636a4ba68d27bf4 Text-German-0.06.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416854
[!] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
All tests successful.
Files=2, Tests=34, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.00 sys + 0.03 cusr 0.00
csys = 0.05 CPU)
Result: PASS
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 625242] Review Request: clustershell - Efficient cluster administration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625242
Thomas Spura changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Spura 2010-08-22
07:49:17 EDT ---
Nice software...
I'm no sponsor, so just some comments for now:
- it would be much more readable, if you use the same indentation everywhere
(but that's just costmetic)
- Buildroot tag is wrong:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#BuildRoot_tag
But if you don't want to make this a package in el5, you could also delete it
completely.
- Please preserve timestamps, when copying files around (cp -a or install -p).
- First line: prefer global vs define,
See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define
You could use this macro:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros
- Please be a bit more explicit in %files:
When using:
%{python_sitelib}/ClusterShell/
%{python_sitelib}/ClusterShell-*-py?.?.egg-info
you know, when building the egg failed.
--
Configure 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 617141] Review Request: gupnp-dlna - A collection of helpers for building DLNA applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=617141 --- Comment #4 from Peter Robinson 2010-08-22 08:02:07 EDT --- Some updates including up to 0.3.0 (with a patch to fix the build): SPEC: as above SRPM: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/gupnp-dlna-0.3.0-1.fc14.src.rpm koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416946 -- Configure 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 624461] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Norwegian - Porter's stemming algorithm for Norwegian
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624461 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-08-22 08:29:24 EDT --- Taking. -- Configure 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 624465] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem - Stemming of words
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-08-22 08:28:35 EDT --- Taking. -- Configure 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 616357] Review Request: spamassassin-FuzzyOcr - Spamassassin plugin to identify image spam
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=616357 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System 2010-08-22 08:53:07 EDT --- spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.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 616357] Review Request: spamassassin-FuzzyOcr - Spamassassin plugin to identify image spam
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=616357 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System 2010-08-22 08:53:16 EDT --- spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.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 616357] Review Request: spamassassin-FuzzyOcr - Spamassassin plugin to identify image spam
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=616357 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System 2010-08-22 08:53:26 EDT --- spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.fc14 -- Configure 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 616357] Review Request: spamassassin-FuzzyOcr - Spamassassin plugin to identify image spam
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=616357 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System 2010-08-22 08:53:35 EDT --- spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/spamassassin-FuzzyOcr-3.6.0-4.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 624461] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Norwegian - Porter's stemming algorithm for Norwegian
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624461
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman
2010-08-22 09:07:11 EDT ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416996
[x] Rpmlint output:
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary stemmer-no
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.src: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/A/AS/ASKSH/Snowball-Norwegian-1.2.tar.gz
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.spec: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Snowball-Norwegian.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/A/AS/ASKSH/Snowball-Norwegian-1.2.tar.gz
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings.
No man page for a binary. Ugh.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
No buildroot defined, default is used
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
Note that the header of lib/Lingua/Stem/Snowball/No.pm says GPLv2 only while
the pod embedded in the file says "under the same terms as Perl itself".
Given that the module's META.yml says "license: perl", I'm going with the
latter but it would be nice to notify upstream so that it can clarify this.
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
24197e600ea4d9b5bb5ca9c175f14676 Snowball-Norwegian-1.2.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2416996
[!] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
All tests successful.
Files=3, Tests=20631, 6 wallclock secs (
[Bug 624463] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Swedish - Porter's stemming algorithm for Swedish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624463 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-08-22 09:22:12 EDT --- Taking. -- Configure 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 624465] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem - Stemming of words
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman
2010-08-22 09:36:53 EDT ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2417096
[x] Rpmlint output:
perl-Snowball-Swedish.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary stemmer-se
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/A/AS/ASKSH/Snowball-Swedish-1.2.tar.gz
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/A/AS/ASKSH/Snowball-Swedish-1.2.tar.gz
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
No buildroot defined, default is used
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
This one has the same problem as #624461. Header says GPLv2 only, pod says
Perl.
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
e2ed0f5c2a9fc7e500c61553c4c1e9c9 Snowball-Swedish-1.2.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2417096
[!] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
All tests successful.
Files=3, Tests=30626, 10 wallclock secs ( 3.72 usr 0.23 sys + 9.10 cusr 0.21
csys = 13.26 CPU)
Result: PASS
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.
[Bug 626175] New: Review Request: DeTex - is a filter program that removes the LaTeX control sequences from tex files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: DeTex - is a filter program that removes the LaTeX control sequences from tex files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626175 Summary: Review Request: DeTex - is a filter program that removes the LaTeX control sequences from tex files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: d...@ribalba.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.ribalba.de/dump/detex.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ribalba.de/geek/port/src/detex-2.8-1.src.rpm Description: DeTeX is a filter program that removes the LaTeX (or TeX) control sequences from the input so that the real content can be passed to a spell or diction checker -- Configure 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 626175] Review Request: DeTex - is a filter program that removes the LaTeX control sequences from tex files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626175 Didi Hoffmann changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 626175] Review Request: DeTex - is a filter program that removes the LaTeX control sequences from tex files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626175 Christoph Wickert changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||cwick...@fedoraproject.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cwick...@fedoraproject.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert 2010-08-22 10:16:17 EDT --- I#m going to take this over, 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 626175] Review Request: DeTex - is a filter program that removes the LaTeX control sequences from tex files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626175 Lameire Alexis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alexisis-pristont...@hotmai ||l.com --- Comment #2 from Lameire Alexis 2010-08-22 10:32:29 EDT --- Although this review is in progress, I see two (very) little issues: - on the summary, you must write TeX and LaTeX, not Tex/LaTex ;) - you should indent all the values in your preamble. -- Configure 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 601115] Review Request: lockfile-progs - safely lock and unlock files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=601115
Peter Robinson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #10 from Peter Robinson 2010-08-22 10:35:39
EDT ---
Looks good. You don't need BuildRoot: anymore so that can be removed. Other
than that APPROVED
+ rpmlint output
$ rpmlint lockfile-progs.spec lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14.src.rpm
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14.x86_64.rpm
lockfile-progs-debuginfo-0.1.15-2.fc14.x86_64.rpm
lockfile-progs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblockfile ->
blockbusting, blockbuster, Blockbuster
lockfile-progs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblockfile ->
blockbusting, blockbuster, Blockbuster
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ license matches the actual package license
+ latest version packaged
+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
abfcda83a1868073673f4d78066b8f8a lockfile-progs_0.1.15.tar.gz
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
tested using koji scratch build
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun+ does not use Prefix: /usr
n/a package owns all directories it creates
n/a no duplicate files in %files
+ Package perserves timestamps on install
Permissions on files must be set properly
+ %defattr line
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package runtime
n/a header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8
Optional:
n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream to include it
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if
available
+ reviewer should build the package in mock/koji
n/a the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
n/a review should test the package functions as described
+ scriptlets should be sane
n/a non -devel packages should require fully versioned base
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or
/usr/sbin
+ Package should have man files
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 601115] Review Request: lockfile-progs - safely lock and unlock files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=601115 Till Maas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||opensou...@till.name --- Comment #11 from Till Maas 2010-08-22 10:46:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > Looks good. You don't need BuildRoot: anymore so that can be removed. Other It is still required for EPEL 5 & 4. -- Configure 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 615047] Review Request: scim-panel-vkb-gtk - A GTK Virtual Keyboard for SCIM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=615047 Peter Robinson changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|538447(MeeGo1) | -- Configure 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 623871] Review Request: flies-Python-client-client and library for working Flies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=623871 James Ni changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(j...@redhat.com) | --- Comment #7 from James Ni 2010-08-22 10:48:37 EDT --- I made some modify for the source code, license file, Spec file and README based on Ding's comment, and submit the new version to fedorapeople. You can find the new version in following URL: Spec URL: http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/flies-python-client/flies-python-client.spec SRPM URL: http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/flies-python-client/flies-python-client-0.0.3-1.fc13.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 625242] Review Request: clustershell - Efficient cluster administration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625242 --- Comment #6 from Stephane Thiell 2010-08-22 10:55:11 EDT --- Many thanks Thomas for your review. Updated files: Spec URL: http://coral.thiell.com/uploads/fedora/4/clustershell.spec SRPM URL: http://coral.thiell.com/uploads/fedora/4/clustershell-1.3-4.fc11.src.rpm Notes: - I want to keep BuildRoot for now so that the spec can be used for el5 also. But I fixed it. - I changed the %define for a %global definition for pythin_sitelib, as you told me. I took the recommended macro but removed the pythin_sitearch definition as I'm not using it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624463] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Swedish - Porter's stemming algorithm for Swedish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624463
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman
2010-08-22 12:26:53 EDT ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2417096
[x] Rpmlint output:
perl-Snowball-Swedish.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary stemmer-se
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Snowball-Swedish.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/A/AS/ASKSH/Snowball-Swedish-1.2.tar.gz
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: no-%clean-section
perl-Snowball-Swedish.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/A/AS/ASKSH/Snowball-Swedish-1.2.tar.gz
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
No buildroot defined, default is used
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
This one has the same problem as #624461. Header says GPLv2 only, pod says
Perl.
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
e2ed0f5c2a9fc7e500c61553c4c1e9c9 Snowball-Swedish-1.2.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2417096
[!] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
All tests successful.
Files=3, Tests=30626, 10 wallclock secs ( 3.72 usr 0.23 sys + 9.10 cusr 0.21
csys = 13.26 CPU)
Result: PASS
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.
[Bug 490940] Review Request: pubcookie - Open-source software for intra-institutional web authentication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490940 Rafael Aquini changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|aqu...@linux.com --- Comment #3 from Rafael Aquini 2010-08-22 14:17:09 EDT --- Gabriel, Yes, I'm taking it for review. Upstream has just released a new stable version. Please, consider update this package to it, before we start working. http://pubcookie.org/news/20100820-3.3.5.html Best regards -- Configure 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 620181] Review Request: pastebinit - command line tool to pastebin file
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=620181
--- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-08-22
15:06:14 EDT ---
Some comments:
* BuildRoot
- For Fedora and EPEL6, BuildRoot tag is no longer needed:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
* "sed"ing
--
sed "s|/etc/pastebin.d|%{_datadir}%{name}|g" %{name}
--
- This line does nothing (just outputs the result of sed to stdout)
Perhaps you meant "sed -i"
- %{_datadir}%{name} is expanded as /usr/sharepastebinit
(%{_datadir} = /usr/share, not /usr/share/)
- Also perhaps you want to modify README file, and
"/.pastebin.d" in pastebinit and README.
--
Configure 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 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment 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=470696 --- Comment #59 from Jeroen van Meeuwen 2010-08-22 15:22:54 EDT --- You can only be as disappointed as much as you're willing to sink your teeth into solving the actual problems stated above. That said, before such aforementioned work is actually done, chances are this package will not be included in the regular Fedora distribution or EPEL add-on repository. That said, there are packages; http://mirror.nl.ergo-project.org/repositories/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 601115] Review Request: lockfile-progs - safely lock and unlock files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=601115 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Matthias Runge 2010-08-22 15:26:05 EDT --- Thanks for the review. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: lockfile-progs Short Description: safely lock and unlock files Owners: mrunge Branches: F-13, F-14, devel, EL-5, EL-6 -- Configure 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 621416] Review Request: libgeotiff -- GeoTIFF format library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621416 --- Comment #19 from Volker Fröhlich 2010-08-22 15:26:44 EDT --- What can we do about it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 617141] Review Request: gupnp-dlna - A collection of helpers for building DLNA applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=617141
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Runge 2010-08-22
15:56:47 EDT ---
Just had the time for a short look. Are you serious with the following lines?
%description docs
Contains libraries and header files for developing applications that use
%{name}.
A full review will (hopefully) follow tomorrow.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 562585] Review Request: ccd2iso - CloneCD image to ISO image file 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=562585 --- Comment #23 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2010-08-22 17:00:23 EDT --- Hello Mohammed, I see that you didn't import this on git yet. Is there a problem? -- Configure 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 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment 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=470696 --- Comment #60 from Jason Smith 2010-08-22 16:39:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #59) > You can only be as disappointed as much as you're willing to sink your teeth > into solving the actual problems stated above. That would be very difficult since I know absolutely nothing about ruby. My only interest is in setting up a scalable puppet system and as a sysadmin, for obvious reasons, I would prefer to use the native OS package manager, rather than a package management system built-in to and only useful for one specific software tool. > That said, before such aforementioned work is actually done, chances are this > package will not be included in the regular Fedora distribution or EPEL add-on > repository. Why does this have no chance of being included in a RedHat distribution? Is it a licensing issue or something else? > That said, there are packages; > > http://mirror.nl.ergo-project.org/repositories/ Thanks, I will take a look at this next week. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 616881] Review Request: extracc - Package to use C++ pojects with Cruise Control - FE-NEEDSPONSOR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=616881 --- Comment #2 from Christophe LACOMBE 2010-08-22 17:24:56 EDT --- Thanks for that review. I have integrated your comments and generated a new source RPM (corresponding to the new specification file), both available on SourceForge: Spec URL: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/extracc/extracc.spec SRPM URL: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/extracc/extracc-0.5.0-2.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 567028] Review Request: lv2-ll-plugins - Collection of LV2 plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567028 --- Comment #9 from David Cornette 2010-08-22 16:31:10 EDT --- It sounds like a good idea to not package elven. If it is a separate project now, that makes things a little tricky going forward. You can imagine a user upgrade a plugin, and suddenly a program they have been using is gone. Or this plugin package would have to require an elven package, even though many users have no need for it. SO if you want to remove elven, and add the lv2core require, this should be good to go. -- Configure 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 573294] Review Request: kadu - An instant messanger compatile with the Gadu-Gadu protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573294
--- Comment #18 from Radek L 2010-08-22 16:56:44
EDT ---
At last I handled commiting new updates with git and everything is ready to go.
Version 0.6.5.4 has been put in dist-{f12,f13,f14}-update-candidates. Now
working on 0.6.6-beta for rawhide.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 620181] Review Request: pastebinit - command line tool to pastebin file
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=620181
--- Comment #5 from Lameire Alexis
2010-08-22 16:57:22 EDT ---
Hi,
thanks again for your comment. Here is the new version:
SPEC :
http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/pastebinit/1.1-3/pastebinit.spec
SRPM :
http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/pastebinit/1.1-3/pastebinit-1.1-3.fc13.src.rpm
- solved the -i and the missing /
- added new sed to modify the name of the user config. file (~/.pastebinit.d ->
~/.pastebinit)
- moved an example conf. file to %{_docdir}
- deleted BuildRootTag.
I hope this should be OK now :)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 567028] Review Request: lv2-ll-plugins - Collection of LV2 plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567028 --- Comment #10 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2010-08-22 19:59:24 EDT --- Alright SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/lv2-ll-plugins.spec SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/lv2-ll-plugins-0.2.8-4.fc13.src.rpm changelog 0.2.8-4 - Add R: lv2core - Don't build and package elven as it is now a separate project - Remove BR: jack-audio-connection-kit-devel boost-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 589866] Review Request: darktable - Utility to organize and develop raw 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=589866 --- Comment #24 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2010-08-22 21:54:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #23) > I'm a bit lost, where is your rpath patch? Rpath patch: http://fpaste.org/ru5O/ (there "View raw" link is trying to hide :) ). In the nearest future (at the end of August) 0.6 will be released (with this patch included), may be it will be better to wait for a wile. -- Configure 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 562585] Review Request: ccd2iso - CloneCD image to ISO image file 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=562585 --- Comment #24 from Mohammed Safwat 2010-08-22 21:55:52 EDT --- Ah, not actually. I just got busy for a while. I was also reading the instructions for using koji and the commands for using git(through fedpkg) as a replacement for CVS and getting myself familiar with the process. I'll make sure to proceed with importing the package into the appropriate repositories ASAP. -- Configure 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 619395] Review Request: mozc - Opensourced Google Japanese Input
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619395
--- Comment #9 from Akira TAGOH 2010-08-22 22:27:03 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Then:
> ? Obsoletes:
> - I don't see the need of "Obsoletes: ibus-mozc < 0.11.383.102" for another
> reason. As this srpm creates ibus-mozc subpackage, even if this Obsoletes
> does not exist the upgrade path shouldn't be broken.
Okay, I may be confused. let's drop that line then.
> * build.log / Fedora specific compilation flags
> - Still we cannot check if Fedora specific compilation flags are honored
> or not from build.log. Would you consider to apply the patch attached
> to show the actual command line on build.log?
> The result with the attached patch applied is:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2414933
Thanks. that looks nice.
>
> * Directory ownership issue
> - The directory %{_datadir}/ibus-mozc/ is not owned by any packages.
Indeed. fixed.
> * Documents
> - At least some documents indicating license information should be added
> to %doc for main (mozc) binary rpm.
> Would you at least consider to add data/installer/credits_??.html to
> %doc?
Sure. I was thinking of doing that though, it contains the unnecessary license
informations too. I'm not sure if it's good to ship it as is or get rid of the
unnecessary thing or add another 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 624465] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem - Stemming of words
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-22 23:09:27 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Lingua-Stem Short Description: Stemming of words Owners: iarnell Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624345] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru - Porter's stemming algorithm for Russian (KOI8-R only)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624345 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 624461] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Norwegian - Porter's stemming algorithm for Norwegian
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624461 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-22 23:09:08 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Snowball-Norwegian Short Description: Porter's stemming algorithm for Norwegian Owners: iarnell Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624461] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Norwegian - Porter's stemming algorithm for Norwegian
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624461 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 624459] Review Request: perl-Text-German - German grundform reduction
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624459 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 624458] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Snowball-Da - Porter's stemming algorithm for Danish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624458 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 624458] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Snowball-Da - Porter's stemming algorithm for Danish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624458 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-22 23:08:50 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Lingua-Stem-Snowball-Da Short Description: Porter's stemming algorithm for Danish Owners: iarnell Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624463] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Swedish - Porter's stemming algorithm for Swedish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624463 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 624465] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem - Stemming of words
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465 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 624463] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Swedish - Porter's stemming algorithm for Swedish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624463 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-22 23:09:15 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Snowball-Swedish Short Description: Porter's stemming algorithm for Swedish Owners: iarnell Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624459] Review Request: perl-Text-German - German grundform reduction
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624459 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-22 23:09:01 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Text-German Short Description: German grundform reduction Owners: iarnell Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624345] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru - Porter's stemming algorithm for Russian (KOI8-R only)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624345 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-22 23:08:19 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru Short Description: Porter's stemming algorithm for Russian (KOI8-R only) Owners: iarnell Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624465] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem - Stemming of words
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? | --- Comment #4 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-22 23:15:11 EDT --- Wait a minute. I think you've reviewed the wrong package - it looks like you've done perl-Snowball-Swedish twice. -- Configure 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 623871] Review Request: flies-Python-client-client and library for working Flies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=623871 --- Comment #8 from James Ni 2010-08-22 23:12:19 EDT --- I just submit a new release of the package, including an example configuration file and adding dependency needed by fedora 12(and less). You could also find the example configuration file named fliesrc.txt on "http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/flies-python-client/fliesrc.txt";. Spec URL: http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/flies-python-client/flies-python-client.spec SRPM URL: http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/flies-python-client/flies-python-client-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 226457] Merge Review: system-config-httpd
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226457 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Parag AN(पराग) 2010-08-23 00:57:16 EDT --- Thanks to you also for replying quickly and cleaning this package as per current fedora packaging guidelines. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226457] Merge Review: system-config-httpd
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226457 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-08-23 00:57:31 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624465] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem - Stemming of words
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465 --- Comment #5 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-08-23 01:27:22 EDT --- Yeah, I pasted my review in the wrong tab. I'll do this one once its dependencies hit rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 619395] Review Request: mozc - Opensourced Google Japanese Input
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619395 --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-08-23 01:34:21 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > > * Documents > > - At least some documents indicating license information should be added > > to %doc for main (mozc) binary rpm. > > Would you at least consider to add data/installer/credits_??.html to > > %doc? > > Sure. I was thinking of doing that though, it contains the unnecessary license > informations too. I'm not sure if it's good to ship it as is or get rid of the > unnecessary thing or add another one. I think shipping data/installer/credits_??.html as it is is (currently) enough for license information. -- Configure 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 624461] Review Request: perl-Snowball-Norwegian - Porter's stemming algorithm for Norwegian
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624461 --- Comment #4 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-23 01:49:41 EDT --- > [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets > other > legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. > [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > License type: GPL+ or Artistic > > Note that the header of lib/Lingua/Stem/Snowball/No.pm says GPLv2 only while > the pod embedded in the file says "under the same terms as Perl itself". > Given that the module's META.yml says "license: perl", I'm going with the > latter but it would be nice to notify upstream so that it can clarify this. Well spotted. https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=60626 -- Configure 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 624465] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Stem - Stemming of words
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review+ | --- Comment #6 from Iain Arnell 2010-08-23 01:51:40 EDT --- I'll remove the review flag then. -- Configure 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 615577] Review Request: opencc - A library for conversion between traditional and simplified Chinese
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=615577 manuel wolfshant changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #21 from manuel wolfshant 2010-08-23 02:33:17 EDT --- Package APPROVED Do not forget that, as I am your sponsor, you can always contact me directly in case that you need help. If needed, I'll do my best to assist you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 619395] Review Request: mozc - Opensourced Google Japanese Input
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619395 --- Comment #11 from Akira TAGOH 2010-08-23 02:40:07 EDT --- Okay. the above suggestion should be applied to, except ppc build issue: Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/reviews/mozc/mozc.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/reviews/mozc/mozc-0.12.434.102-0.2.20100820svn.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
