[Bug 675388] Review Request: xmlada - full XML stack for Ada
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675388
Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||kr...@land.ru
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kr...@land.ru
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #6 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2011-02-18 03:55:59
EST ---
Take this.
DESTDIR patch contain usless ${}
Liscence is GPLv2_+_
There is a python script without python dep.
--
Configure 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 677300] Review Request: gtksourviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300
Mathieu Bridon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||boche...@fedoraproject.org
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|boche...@fedoraproject.org
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Bridon 2011-02-18
04:24:44 EST ---
[x] package passes
[-] not applicable
[!] package fails
== MUST ==
[x] rpmlint output
[x] The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[x] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[x] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[x] The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
[x] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file must be included in %doc
[x] The spec file must be written in American English
[x] The spec file for the package MUST be legible
[x] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL
$ sha1sum gtksourceviewmm-2.91.5.tar.bz2
54a83ddd5cd946f73180d51138f7a1781c655bb1 gtksourceviewmm-2.91.5.tar.bz2
[x] The package '''MUST''' successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture
[-] The spec file MUST handle locales properly
[x] 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
[x] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries
[-] If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review
[x] 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.
[x] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings
[x] Permissions on files must be set properly
[x] Each package must consistently use macros
[x] The package must contain code, or permissable content
[x] Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
$ rpm2cpio gtksourceviewmm3-devel-2.91.5-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm | cpio -id
5957 blocks
$ du -sh usr/share/gtk-doc
2.9M usr/share/gtk-doc
[x] If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application
[x] Header files must be in a -devel package
[-] Static libraries must be in a -static package
[x] If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package
[!] Subpackages requiring the base package
[x] Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built
[-] Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,
and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section
[x] Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8
== SHOULD ==
[-] If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it
[-] If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane
[-] Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using
a fully versioned dependency
[x] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is
usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg
[-] If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself
[-] your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts
== To fix ==
The -devel subpackage requires the base one without specifying the
architecture. From the packaging guidelines:
"""
When a subpackage requires the base package, it must do so using a fully
versioned arch-specific (for non-noarch packages) dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
"""
== Notes ==
The -devel subpackage includes this file:
%{_includedir}/*
It doesn't seem necessary since all files installed in /usr/include are already
covered by this line:
%{_includedir}/%{tarname}-%{apiver}
--
Configure 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/listinf
[Bug 677300] Review Request: gtksourviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300 --- Comment #3 from Haïkel Guémar 2011-02-18 04:43:14 EST --- Thank you Mathieu for your review. I already fixed the architecture requirements issue, for the headers, they are versionned as you might have different versions of the gtkmm stack installed in parallel (Fedora actually ships gtkmm24/gtkmm30). The spec and src.rpm above were updated and i submitted a scratch build. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2848773 -- Configure 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 677300] Review Request: gtksourviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300
Mathieu Bridon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Mathieu Bridon 2011-02-18
05:16:48 EST ---
Ok, just remove the redondant %{_includedir}/* when importing the package then.
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 677300] Review Request: gtksourviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300 Haïkel Guémar changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Haïkel Guémar 2011-02-18 05:20:26 EST --- One shall not be hammered when packaging, i'll remove that useless bit before building. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: gtksourceviewmm3 Short Description: A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3 Owners: hguemar Branches: f15 InitialCC: hguemar -- Configure 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 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and 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=452427 --- Comment #111 from Michal Nowak 2011-02-18 05:56:37 EST --- Anyone's aware what's the status on XCB in Cairo front? Also, anyone's aware what happens in their Git (http://git.naquadah.org/?p=awesome.git;a=summary)? It seems to me that the new major release takes ages... -- Configure 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 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and 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=452427 --- Comment #112 from Jim Meyering 2011-02-18 06:08:30 EST --- Not aware, but definitely annoyed to still have to build my own RPMs, and especially to have to rebuild any time cairo changes. I thought the XCB/Cairo transition was to have been resolved for Fedora 14. -- Configure 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 670608] Review Request: libgaiagraphics - Graphics canvas for GIS rendering
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670608
Mario Blättermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mari...@gnome.org
--- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann 2011-02-18 07:03:06
EST ---
$ rpmlint libgaiagraphics*src.rpm
libgaiagraphics.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Libgaigraphics ->
Stratigraphical, Calligraphic, Stratigraphic
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
GPLv3+
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[X] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
The package name in %description is unique and not included in usual
dictionaries. Doesn't matter that rpmlint decries the name.
Small typo in the description: "Libgaigraphics" has to be changed into
"Libgaiagraphics".
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum libgaiagraphics-0.4.tar.gz{,.packaged}
43321ff1ccfdf33980b55897e68344e9 libgaiagraphics-0.4.tar.gz
43321ff1ccfdf33980b55897e68344e9 libgaiagraphics-0.4.tar.gz.packaged
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[+] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[+] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[.] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream...
[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
It builds at least for the x86 architecture.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
Not done yet. I assume the packager has tested its functions properly...
[.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[+] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ...
[.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.
Currently no man page available.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this ma
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and 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=452427 --- Comment #113 from Thomas Moschny 2011-02-18 07:00:42 EST --- (In reply to comment #112) > Not aware, but definitely annoyed to still have to build my own RPMs, > and especially to have to rebuild any time cairo changes. As always, RPMS for current stable releases are in http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/thm/awesome/ I just stopped announcing that anytime there's a new version. -- Configure 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 678554] New: Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 Summary: Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: zht...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SRPM URL: http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/zhtx/iceplayer/fedora-14/SRPMS/iceplayer-4.0.3-20110214.src.rpm Description: A simple media player. It can download lyrics and show them automatically, and supports themes, ID3, Equalizer and more. -- Configure 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 650667] Review Request: hitori - Hitori game 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=650667 --- Comment #16 from Mario Blättermann 2011-02-18 07:19:22 EST --- I've changed the English and German descriptions a bit, and added the ChangeLog to %docs. New source rpm is here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19373040/Fedora/hitori-0.2.6-3.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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov 2011-02-18 07:28:24 EST --- Everything in the spec file is supposed to be in American English AFAIK. -- Configure 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 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and 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=452427 --- Comment #114 from Jim Meyering 2011-02-18 07:47:05 EST --- Thanks. I've used those and do appreciate them. If you were to do the same for rawhide, I would be all set ;-) -- Configure 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 664619] Review Request: jspeex - Java Implementation of Speex
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664619 --- Comment #8 from Hicham HAOUARI 2011-02-18 07:51:18 EST --- Sorry, I will finish it 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 678337] Review Request: apache-commons-csv - Utilities to assist with handling of CSV 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=678337 Vít Ondruch changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678337] Review Request: apache-commons-csv - Utilities to assist with handling of CSV 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=678337
Vít Ondruch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||vondr...@redhat.com
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Vít Ondruch 2011-02-18 08:24:37 EST
---
Taking this one.
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
apache-commons-csv.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/maven/fragments/apache-commons-csv
Should be marked as %config or should not be under /etc. The later is the
correct way IMO.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 2.0
[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.
[-] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[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.
Diferences checked by diff, since svn or xz archive is not reliable for md5 sum
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[!] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt are duplicated in base and doc subpackage.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] 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.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom
file (use "JPP." and "JPP-" correctly)
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven2.jpp.depmap.file=*" explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package uses %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-utils (for
%update_maven_depmap macro)
=== Other suggestions ===
[-] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[-] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
=== Issues ===
1. Please fix the duplicated README and LICENSE before committing.
*** 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 677391] Review Request: lovelock-kde-theme - Lovelock KDE Theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677391 Jaroslav Reznik changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jaroslav Reznik 2011-02-18 08:32:17 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: lovelock-kde-theme Short Description: Lovelock KDE Theme Owners: jreznik rdieter than kkofler Branches: f15 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 676124] Review Request: racket - replacement package for renamed plt-scheme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676124 Gérard Milmeister changed: What|Removed |Added CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de --- Comment #2 from Gérard Milmeister 2011-02-18 08:35:50 EST --- *** Bug 451092 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676939] Review Request: libeiskaltdcpp - A client library for the DC file sharing 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=676939 Sergio Belkin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seb...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Sergio Belkin 2011-02-18 08:38:38 EST --- Hi, I think that you should use tools like koji and mock in order to be sure that package is built. Currently it is failing on koji: CMake Error at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindPackageHandleStandardArgs.cmake:91 (MESSAGE): Could NOT find OpenSSL (missing: OPENSSL_LIBRARIES OPENSSL_INCLUDE_DIR) AFAIS, openssl-devel is missing in BuildRequires. Also you should fix the permission on tarball file. Remove the execution mode bits. And on spec file: use %post -p instead of using: %post , the same goes for the %postun section. Besides you may find the following pages really useful: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_Mock_to_test_package_builds http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/UsingKoji Still I am not a sponsor but I hope that it helps :) -- Configure 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 670608] Review Request: libgaiagraphics - Graphics canvas for GIS rendering
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670608
Martin Gieseking changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de
--- Comment #2 from Martin Gieseking 2011-02-18
08:40:13 EST ---
In addition to Mario's informal review:
- According to the source file headers, libgaiagraphics is licensed under
LGPLv3+. File COPYING contains the GPLv3 license text. Please adapt the
License field and ask upstream to provide the correct license text with the
tarball.
- I recommend to use macro %{version} in Source0 to simplify future updates.
- Add a short comment above Patch0 telling what the patch does.
- Please be more specific in %files, especially if only single files are added.
This helps to prevent accidentally packaging unwanted files:
%{_libdir}/libgaiagraphics.so.*
%{_includedir}/gaiagraphics.h
%{_libdir}/libgaiagraphics.so
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/gaiagraphics.pc
- If you want to maintain the package for EPEL < 6 too, add
Requires: pkgconfig to the -devel subpackage. Otherwise, you can drop all
the buildroot stuff.
$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-i386/result/*.rpm
libgaiagraphics.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Libgaigraphics ->
Stratigraphical, Calligraphic, Stratigraphic
libgaiagraphics.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib/libgaiagraphics.so.1.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.0
libgaiagraphics.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Libgaigraphics ->
Stratigraphical, Calligraphic, Stratigraphic
libgaiagraphics-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
- fix the spelling error as per Mario's comment
- shared-lib-calls-exit can be ignored but should possibly be fixed upstream
- no-documentation is expected and can be ignored
--
Configure 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 --- Comment #2 from zht...@gmail.com 2011-02-18 08:39:39 EST --- Everything updated. -- Configure 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 677391] Review Request: lovelock-kde-theme - Lovelock KDE Theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677391 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 08:53:42 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure 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 677300] Review Request: gtksourviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 08:53:18 EST --- The requested package name and the package name in the ticket summary do not match. Please fix whichever is incorrect and re-raise the fedora-cvs flag. -- Configure 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 659368] Review Request: luabind - A library that helps create bindings between C++ and Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659368 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-02-18 09:06:34 EST --- luabind-0.9.1-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/luabind-0.9.1-1.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 659368] Review Request: luabind - A library that helps create bindings between C++ and Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659368 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-02-18 09:06:25 EST --- luabind-0.9.1-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/luabind-0.9.1-1.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 659368] Review Request: luabind - A library that helps create bindings between C++ and Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659368 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure 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 674666] Review Request: python-translationstring - Utility library for i18n relied on by various Repoze packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674666 Tim Lauridsen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(t...@rasmil.dk)| --- Comment #6 from Tim Lauridsen 2011-02-18 09:08:18 EST --- 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554
Mario Blättermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mari...@gnome.org
--- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann 2011-02-18 09:08:42
EST ---
$ rpmlint iceplayer*
iceplayer.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C iceplayer - A powerful media player
for Linux
iceplayer.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C iceplayer
iceplayer.src: E: no-changelogname-tag
iceplayer.src: W: invalid-license GPL
iceplayer.src: W: invalid-url Source0: iceplayer-4.0.3-20110214.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
The "Summary:" shouldn't repeat the package name.
The given source URL is not existent. The current download URL is:
http://iceplayer.googlecode.com/files/iceplayer%20src%20%204.03-20110118.tar.gz
Note that we have whitespaces in the filename, escaped with %20.
The license description should match any from the Fedora packaging guidelines:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
In our case, it has to be "GPLv3", unless in future versions of this
application the authors will decide to go ahead with any successors of the
GPLv3, then it has to be changed to GPLv3+.
The %changelog is still missing. Without it, we are unable to track changes to
your package.
Remove the executable bit from any installed files, which don't need it. This
affects the files in %doc and the files in %{_datadir}.
Don't add empty files to %docs. README and NEWS are currently empty.
Use consistenly macros. The %files section should be:
%defattr (-,root,root)
%doc COPYING AUTHORS
%{_bindir}/*
%{_datadir}/%{name}/
%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
Some "BuildRequires:" are missing. The package depends on GTK2 and GStreamer.
That's why you have to define the following:
BuildRequires: gtk2-devel gstreamer-devel
The latter points to the required gstreamer-0.10 development package.
Generally, you shouldn't leave any comments in languages other than American
English in the spec file. The Chinese ones are not really useful.
--
Configure 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 674671] Review Request: python-repoze-lru - A tiny LRU cache implementation and decorator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674671 Tim Lauridsen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(t...@rasmil.dk)| --- Comment #7 from Tim Lauridsen 2011-02-18 09:09:59 EST --- 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 --- Comment #4 from Mario Blättermann 2011-02-18 09:13:23 EST --- Referring to your updated package: The "Add later" comment to the %changelog section is odd. What do you think what's a changelog for? It is here for tracking the changes, not only to fulfill the packaging rules. For any change in your package, you have to add a changelog entry and to screw up the version number. -- Configure 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 674667] Review Request: python-venusian - A library for deferring decorator actions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674667 Tim Lauridsen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(t...@rasmil.dk)| --- Comment #6 from Tim Lauridsen 2011-02-18 09:11:32 EST --- 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 677391] Review Request: lovelock-kde-theme - Lovelock KDE Theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677391 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure 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 677391] Review Request: lovelock-kde-theme - Lovelock KDE Theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677391 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2011-02-18 09:27:28 EST --- lovelock-kde-theme-14.90.1-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lovelock-kde-theme-14.90.1-1.fc15 -- Configure 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 565945] Review Request: pam_csync - a PAM module to provide Roaming Home Directories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=565945 Sergio Belkin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seb...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Sergio Belkin 2011-02-18 09:32:22 EST --- Hi, I'm not a sponsor, but koji fails to build the package. It seems that libcsync-devel is not in official fedora repos. Hope that helps. -- Configure 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 677300] Review Request: gtksourceviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300 Haïkel Guémar changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gtksourviewmm3 - A C++ |gtksourceviewmm3 - A C++ |wrapper for gtksourceview3 |wrapper for gtksourceview3 -- Configure 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 677297] Review Request: php-pear-Net-IDNA2 - PHP library for punycode encoding and decoding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677297 Terje Røsten changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-02-18 09:40:36 --- Comment #8 from Terje Røsten 2011-02-18 09:40:36 EST --- Thanks! Imported, built and pushed. -- Configure 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 --- Comment #6 from Mario Blättermann 2011-02-18 09:40:38 EST --- Just seen there's really a source tarball which almost matches the defined source: http://iceplayer.googlecode.com/files/iceplayer_4.03-20110214_%E6%BA%90%E7%A0%81_%E6%83%85%E4%BA%BA%E8%8A%82%E5%BF%AB%E4%B9%90.tar.gz This is created by copying the link target to the clipboard and paste it here. No idea if it works in the spec file. Don't know whether it is possible to use such names. It's actually unusual to use Chinese characters in filenames. Perhaps you should ask the developers to provide tarballs with ASCII names. Well, creating a MD5 checksum works for the time being. -- Configure 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554
Martin Gieseking changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de
--- Comment #5 from Martin Gieseking 2011-02-18
09:39:15 EST ---
First of all, is this your first Fedora package submission? I can't find your
email address in the packager group. If so, please add FE-NEEDSPONSOR to the
Blocks field above and have a look at the following pages for further
information:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored
Please also enter your real name in the Bugzilla preferences.
Some additional comments on your package:
- drop the initial %define
- the Release field should be something like %{X}%{?dist} where %{X} is the
number to increase every time you provide a new revision of your SRPM.
You may also add the date to the release field: %{X}.20110214%{?dist}
To simplify packaging, add
%global rev 20110214
at the beginning of the spec file and use the macro %{rev} everywhere the
date is required.
- libnotify-devel is also required to build the package
- add %{_smp_mflags} to "make" in order to enable parallel builds
- replace %defattr (-,root,root) with %defattr (-,root,root,-)
--
Configure 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 675388] Review Request: xmlada - full XML stack for Ada
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675388 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 09:48:39 EST --- Please wait until the ada packaging guidelines have at least been discussed by the packaging committee before approving this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 677300] Review Request: gtksourceviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300 Haïkel Guémar changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Haïkel Guémar 2011-02-18 09:44:26 EST --- fixed the typo in summary. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: gtksourceviewmm3 Short Description: A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3 Owners: hguemar Branches: f15 InitialCC: hguemar -- Configure 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 670608] Review Request: libgaiagraphics - Graphics canvas for GIS rendering
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670608 --- Comment #3 from Volker Fröhlich 2011-02-18 10:21:49 EST --- Thank you for reviewing. I sent an e-mail and will put up a corrected package as soon as I get a reply. The license actually should be GPLv3+. The developer must have forgotten to replace 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 675388] Review Request: xmlada - full XML stack for Ada
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675388 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||or...@cora.nwra.com --- Comment #8 from Orion Poplawski 2011-02-18 10:19:52 EST --- Is that likely to happen anytime soon? I don't even see a proposal? I'd like to see something too for help with the plplot-ada sub-package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672845] Review Request: rubygem-net-ping - Net::Ping rubygem 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=672845 --- Comment #4 from Lukáš Zapletal 2011-02-18 10:21:47 EST --- Vito, thanks for the review. All your remarks were included. I also created a subpackage. And you were right - it needs iputils now :-) Tests are failing on our koji due to blocked internet connectivity. Communicating with upstream about this. I will create a patch to disable these tests and upstream will possibly merge it. I will push my changes 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554
--- Comment #7 from zht...@gmail.com 2011-02-18 10:32:44 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> $ rpmlint iceplayer*
> iceplayer.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C iceplayer - A powerful media
> player
> for Linux
> iceplayer.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C iceplayer
> iceplayer.src: E: no-changelogname-tag
> iceplayer.src: W: invalid-license GPL
> iceplayer.src: W: invalid-url Source0: iceplayer-4.0.3-20110214.tar.gz
> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
>
> The "Summary:" shouldn't repeat the package name.
>
> The given source URL is not existent. The current download URL is:
> http://iceplayer.googlecode.com/files/iceplayer%20src%20%204.03-20110118.tar.gz
> Note that we have whitespaces in the filename, escaped with %20.
This URL is not a tgz maked by "make dist".
Can't use it to make a rpm currently.
I have uploaded the valid tgz to fedorapeople.org.
>
> The license description should match any from the Fedora packaging guidelines:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
> In our case, it has to be "GPLv3", unless in future versions of this
> application the authors will decide to go ahead with any successors of the
> GPLv3, then it has to be changed to GPLv3+.
Changed to GPLv3
>
> The %changelog is still missing. Without it, we are unable to track changes to
> your package.
Added.
>
> Remove the executable bit from any installed files, which don't need it. This
> affects the files in %doc and the files in %{_datadir}.
>
> Don't add empty files to %docs. README and NEWS are currently empty.
>
> Use consistenly macros. The %files section should be:
>
> %defattr (-,root,root)
> %doc COPYING AUTHORS
> %{_bindir}/*
> %{_datadir}/%{name}/
> %{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
Changed.
>
> Some "BuildRequires:" are missing. The package depends on GTK2 and GStreamer.
> That's why you have to define the following:
>
> BuildRequires: gtk2-devel gstreamer-devel
>
> The latter points to the required gstreamer-0.10 development package.
Added.
>
>
> Generally, you shouldn't leave any comments in languages other than American
> English in the spec file. The Chinese ones are not really useful.
Changed.
Please try.
SRPM URL:
http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/zhtx/iceplayer/fedora-14/SRPMS/iceplayer-4.0.3-1.src.rpm
TGZ URL: http://ekd123.fedorapeople.org/iceplayer-4.0.3-20110214.tar.gz
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 Jussi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #8 from Jussi Lehtola 2011-02-18 10:34:07 EST --- Where's the spec file? Please input your full name in Bugzilla. -- Configure 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 Jussi Lehtola 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 --- Comment #9 from zht...@gmail.com 2011-02-18 10:42:30 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) > Where's the spec file? > > Please input your full name in Bugzilla. There is the specfile. http://ekd123.fedorapeople.org/iceplayer.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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 --- Comment #10 from Jussi Lehtola 2011-02-18 10:48:12 EST --- Increment the release tag whenever you make changes to the spec file, and make a corresponding entry in the changelog. Otherwise it is impossible for other people to see what has been done and at what stage. -- Configure 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 675388] Review Request: xmlada - full XML stack for Ada
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675388 --- Comment #9 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-02-18 11:01:47 EST --- Orion, https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/56 Packaging Ada draft was in agenda yesterday: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2011-February/007646.html -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- Configure 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 --- Comment #11 from Mike Ma 2011-02-18 10:59:46 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) > Increment the release tag whenever you make changes to the spec file, and make > a corresponding entry in the changelog. I know. Changed it to 5. But I think it's unnecessary to edit changelog section. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 675388] Review Request: xmlada - full XML stack for Ada
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675388 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added External Bug ID||FedoraHosted 56 --- Comment #10 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-02-18 11:02:28 EST --- -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- Configure 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 678230] Review Request: kmldonkey - Cross-platform graphical user interface for Mldonkey
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678230
Pavel Zhukov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-02-18 11:39:25 EST ---
# MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]
* OK
# MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
.
* OK
# MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
* OK
# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
* OK
# MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
* OK (GPLv2+)
# MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. [3]
* 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.[4]
* OK
# MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
* OK
# MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
* OK:
# MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
* OK
# MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]
* OK
# MUST: If the package does not successfully compile
* OK
# MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines
* OK
# MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
* OK
# 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. [10]
* OK
# 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.
* OK
# MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. [13]
* OK
# MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14]
* 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. [15]
* OK
# MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16]
* OK
# MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17]
* 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). [18]
* OK
# 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. [18]
* OK
# MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [19]
* OK
# MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package. [19]
* OK
# MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release} [21]
* OK
# MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.[20]
* OK
# MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need
a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
[22]
* OK
# MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
* OK
# MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [24]
* OK
Please contact upstream for include man page for %{_bindir//kmldonkey}
ACCEPT
This package is approved.
--
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
--
Configure 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
[Bug 675104] Review Request: tweepy - Twitter library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675104 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #8 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-02-18 11:52:51 EST --- change status -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- Configure 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 678634] New: Review Request: Saaghar - A Cross-Platform Persian Poetry Software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: Saaghar - A Cross-Platform Persian Poetry Software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678634 Summary: Review Request: Saaghar - A Cross-Platform Persian Poetry Software Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: heday...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://hedayat.fedorapeople.org/reviews/Saaghar/Saaghar.spec SRPM URL: http://hedayat.fedorapeople.org/reviews/Saaghar/Saaghar-0.7.2-1.1051.fc14.src.rpm Description: Saaghar is a cross-platform Persian poetry software. It uses http://ganjoor.net database. It has lots of features: * Tabbed UI * Tabbed and dock-able search widgets * Print and Print Preview * Export, It supports exporting to "PDF", "HTML", "TeX", "CSV" and "TXT" * Copy and Multi-selection * Customisable interface Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849523 -- Configure 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 650667] Review Request: hitori - Hitori game 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=650667
Martin Gieseking changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #17 from Martin Gieseking 2011-02-18
12:29:39 EST ---
The package looks good now. Just replace "%docs" with "%%docs" or simply "docs"
to make rpmlint happy.
The next step is to request a Git repository with the distro branches you're
planning to maintain. See the following wiki page for further information:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure
$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm
hitori.src:90: W: macro-in-%changelog %docs
hitori.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hitori
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
application: GPLv3+
manual: CC-BY-SA
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum hitori-0.2.6.tar.bz2*
d83b81019837882175aaf97ee8d7 hitori-0.2.6.tar.bz2
d83b81019837882175aaf97ee8d7 hitori-0.2.6.tar.bz2.1
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
koji scratch build (f15):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849510
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[+] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[+] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
EPEL <= 5 only:
[+] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field.
[+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream,...
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin
[Bug 634760] Review Request: amavisd-milter - Sendmail milter for amavisd-new with support for the AM.PDP 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=634760 Sergio Belkin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seb...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Sergio Belkin 2011-02-18 13:13:24 EST --- Hi, I am not still member of packaging group, however I hope that you find my casual review useful: 1. You use localstatedir /var/amavis Why? AFAIK amavisd-new in fedora doesn't use that directory: repoquery -l amavisd-new | grep "var\/amavis" |wc -l 0 2. BuildRoot: and clean section are not needed anymore. 3. Beware you have some issue about initscript file, run rpmlint, you should not enable a service by default, take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript. Also you will find interesting http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/var-run-tmpfs. 4. Also this is no an error, but be aware that you're not using dist tag: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag Hope that helps. -- Configure 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 668052] Review Request: libtpms - Library providing Trusted Platform Module (TPM) functionality
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668052 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Berger 2011-02-18 13:13:36 EST --- We just update the spec file and rpm and made the .tgz available. Now the src rpm passes rpmlint without complaint. -- Configure 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 668052] Review Request: libtpms - Library providing Trusted Platform Module (TPM) functionality
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668052 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Berger 2011-02-18 13:28:31 EST --- New URLS: Spec URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/trousers/files/QEMU/libtpms.spec SRPM URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/trousers/files/QEMU/libtpms-0.5.1-1.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 674671] Review Request: python-repoze-lru - A tiny LRU cache implementation and decorator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674671 Luke Macken changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Luke Macken 2011-02-18 14:06:21 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-repoze-lru Short Description: A tiny LRU cache implementation and decorator Owners: lmacken Branches: f14 f15 el5 el6 -- Configure 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 674666] Review Request: python-translationstring - Utility library for i18n relied on by various Repoze packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674666 Luke Macken changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Luke Macken 2011-02-18 14:07:55 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-translationstring Short Description: Utility library for i18n relied on by various Repoze packages Owners: lmacken Branches: f14 f15 el5 el6 -- Configure 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 674667] Review Request: python-venusian - A library for deferring decorator actions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674667 Luke Macken changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Luke Macken 2011-02-18 14:07:14 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-venusian Short Description: A library for deferring decorator actions Owners: lmacken Branches: f14 f15 el5 el6 -- Configure 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 676879] Review Request: mpiexec - MPI job launcher that uses the PBS task interface directly
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676879 Sergio Belkin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seb...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Sergio Belkin 2011-02-18 14:23:32 EST --- Hi Christos, I am (still) not member of packaging group, however I hope you find the following points useful: 1. Fix the Group. 2. Fix the Source URL 3. Fix the license: Enter the right "Short Name" as is listed on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses. Greets -- Configure 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 674667] Review Request: python-venusian - A library for deferring decorator actions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674667 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 14:32:07 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure 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 677300] Review Request: gtksourceviewmm3 - A C++ wrapper for gtksourceview3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677300 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 14:32:49 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure 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 674671] Review Request: python-repoze-lru - A tiny LRU cache implementation and decorator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674671 --- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 14:32:20 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure 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 674666] Review Request: python-translationstring - Utility library for i18n relied on by various Repoze packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674666 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 14:31:51 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure 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 634911] Review Request: nodejs - Evented I/O for v8 JavaScript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634911 Damian Wrobel changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|dwro...@ertelnet.rybnik.pl |nob...@fedoraproject.org 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 668052] Review Request: libtpms - Library providing Trusted Platform Module (TPM) functionality
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668052 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Berger 2011-02-18 14:55:40 EST --- I am switching now the file hosting to my own public hosting space on sourceforge: SPEC: http://bergerstefan.users.sourceforge.net/libtpms/libtpms.spec SRPM: http://bergerstefan.users.sourceforge.net/libtpms/libtpms-0.5.1-2.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 650667] Review Request: hitori - Hitori game 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=650667 --- Comment #18 from Mario Blättermann 2011-02-18 15:27:13 EST --- OK, I've changed to %docs macro mentioned in %changelog to %%doc now. I will have a look at the Git repo procedure next days. Many thanks for your help! -- Configure 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 650280] Review Request: rubygem-rspec-mocks - Rspec-2 doubles (mocks and stubs)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650280 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka 2011-02-18 15:27:00 EST --- Updated: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-rspec-mocks/rubygem-rspec-mocks.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-rspec-mocks/rubygem-rspec-mocks-2.5.0-1.fc.src.rpm * Thu Feb 17 2011 Mamoru Tasaka - 2.5.0-1 - 2.5.0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650282] Review Request: rubygem-rspec-expectations - Rspec-2 expectations (should and matchers)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650282 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka 2011-02-18 15:28:09 EST --- Updated. http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-rspec-expectations/rubygem-rspec-expectations.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-rspec-expectations/rubygem-rspec-expectations-2.5.0-1.fc.src.rpm * Thu Feb 17 2011 Mamoru Tasaka - 2.5.0-1 - 2.5.0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650283] Review Request: rubygem-rspec-core - Rspec-2 runner and formatters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650283 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka 2011-02-18 15:29:10 EST --- Updated. http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-rspec-core/rubygem-rspec-core.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-rspec-core/rubygem-rspec-core-2.5.1-1.fc.src.rpm * Thu Feb 17 2011 Mamoru Tasaka - 2.5.1-1 - 2.5.1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678676] New: Review Request: rubygem-gtksourceview2 - Ruby binding of gtksourceview-2.x
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-gtksourceview2 - Ruby binding of gtksourceview-2.x https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678676 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-gtksourceview2 - Ruby binding of gtksourceview-2.x Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-gtksourceview2/rubygem-gtksourceview2.spec SRPM URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-gtksourceview2/rubygem-gtksourceview2-0.90.7-2.fc.src.rpm Description: Ruby/GtkSourceView2 is a Ruby binding of gtksourceview-2.x. Koji scratch build For F-15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849725 For F-14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849722 -- Configure 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 678674] New: Review Request: rubygem-goocanvas - Ruby binding of GooCanvas
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-goocanvas - Ruby binding of GooCanvas https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678674 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-goocanvas - Ruby binding of GooCanvas Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-goocanvas/rubygem-goocanvas.spec SRPM URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-goocanvas/rubygem-goocanvas-0.90.7-2.fc.src.rpm Description: Ruby/GooCanvas is a Ruby binding of GooCanvas. Koji scratch build for F-15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849756 for F-14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849757 -- Configure 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 678678] New: Review Request: rubygem-vte - Ruby binding of vte
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-vte - Ruby binding of vte https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678678 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-vte - Ruby binding of vte Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-vte/rubygem-vte.spec SRPM URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-vte/rubygem-vte-0.90.7-2.fc.src.rpm Description: Ruby/VTE is a Ruby binding of VTE Koji scratch build for F-15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849714 for F-14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2849717 -- Configure 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 678680] New: Review Request: transifex-client - Command line tool for Transifex translation management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: transifex-client - Command line tool for Transifex translation management https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678680 Summary: Review Request: transifex-client - Command line tool for Transifex translation management Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: domingobec...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://beckerde.fedorapeople.org/transifex/transifex-client.spec SRPM URL: http://beckerde.fedorapeople.org/transifex/transifex-client-0.4.2-1.src.rpm Description: The Transifex Command-line Client is a command line tool that enables you to easily manage your translations within a project without the need of an elaborate UI system. -- Configure 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 165572] Review Request: perl-Devel-StackTrace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=165572 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Paul Howarth 2011-02-18 16:08:33 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Devel-StackTrace New Branches: el4 Owners: pghmcfc 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 672951] Review Request: python-elixir - A declarative mapper for SQLAlchemy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672951 Dave Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalc...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Dave Malcolm 2011-02-18 16:09:21 EST --- http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=python26.git;a=blob;f=macros.python26;h=d3e3f9858735b51cee0f71baac2fcf721f4f503e;hb=refs/heads/el5/master contains "%__python26_os_install_post", an alternate implementation of __os_install_post. Looks like we need a %__multiple_pythons_os_install_post, as per what Fedora 13's rpm: see bug 531117 -- Configure 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 225644] Merge Review: classpathx-mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225644 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Flag||fedora-review+ Last Closed||2011-02-18 16:09:22 --- Comment #6 from Orion Poplawski 2011-02-18 16:09:22 EST --- Looks good. 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 219950] Review Request: perl-Pod-Spell - A formatter for spellchecking Pod
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=219950 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Paul Howarth 2011-02-18 16:32:05 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Pod-Spell New Branches: el4 Owners: pghmcfc InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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 678692] New: Review Request: drupal6-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal6-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678692 Summary: Review Request: drupal6-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 6 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pfrie...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/packages/SPECS/drupal6-theme-ninesixty.spec SRPM URL: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/drupal6-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: This theme is based on the 960 Grid System by Nathan Smith. NineSixty is a base theme with all the files provided by the 960 Grid System. >From the sketch sheets to all the styles from the framework are included. There are a few modifications so it better fits into Drupal. All the details are inside the README.txt file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678692] Review Request: drupal6-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678692 Paul W. Frields changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure 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 678692] Review Request: drupal6-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678692 --- Comment #1 from Paul W. Frields 2011-02-18 16:53:11 EST --- $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/drupal6-theme-ninesixty.spec rpmbuild/SRPMS/drupal6-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/drupal6-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678699] New: Review Request: vdrsymbol-fonts - Font for use with VDR plugins and patches
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: vdrsymbol-fonts - Font for use with VDR plugins and patches https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678699 Summary: Review Request: vdrsymbol-fonts - Font for use with VDR plugins and patches Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ville.sky...@iki.fi QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora http://scop.fedorapeople.org/packages/vdrsymbol-fonts.spec http://scop.fedorapeople.org/packages/vdrsymbol-fonts-20100612-1.fc14.src.rpm VDRSymbols is a font for use with VDR plugins and patches. -- Configure 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 678680] Review Request: transifex-client - Command line tool for Transifex translation management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678680 Paul W. Frields changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure 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 678680] Review Request: transifex-client - Command line tool for Transifex translation management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678680 Paul W. Frields changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sticks...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sticks...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678680] Review Request: transifex-client - Command line tool for Transifex translation management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678680 --- Comment #1 from Paul W. Frields 2011-02-18 17:38:51 EST --- Since upstream has not released 0.4.2 yet, this must either be a pre-release (0.4.2-0.1.), or you'll need to package 0.4.1 (which I think is several bugfixes behind). -- Configure 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 676879] Review Request: mpiexec - MPI job launcher that uses the PBS task interface directly
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676879 --- Comment #4 from Christos Triantafyllidis 2011-02-18 18:01:24 EST --- Many thanks Sergio! (In reply to comment #3) > Hi Christos, > > I am (still) not member of packaging group, however I hope you find the > following points useful: > > 1. Fix the Group. Fixed! I searched for what others are using and "Applications/Engineering" seems to be the most popular for mpiexec. > 2. Fix the Source URL Done. > 3. Fix the license: Enter the right "Short Name" as is listed on > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses. Ooops... Done. > > Greets I've also updated it to the latest upstream version. The updated spec is in same location: http://svn.hellasgrid.gr/svn/code.grid.auth.gr/mpiexec/trunk/mpiexec.spec Updated SRPM: http://koji.afroditi.hellasgrid.gr/packages/mpiexec/0.84/1_torque_2.3.13.el5/src/mpiexec-0.84-1_torque_2.3.13.el5.src.rpm Many thanks once more for reviewing this. BTW what is the best way to note that this is build against torque 2.3.13 (currently i'm using release for this). I guess that one could build it agains other queuing systems (if they are in fedora/epel repos). Christos -- Configure 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 551763] Review Request: lua-sec - Lua binding for OpenSSL 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=551763 Thom Carlin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzilla.a...@gmail.com Flag||needinfo?(a...@spicenitz.or ||g) --- Comment #8 from Thom Carlin 2011-02-18 18:11:43 EST --- Adam, any updates on this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678714] New: Review Request: rhythmbox-radio-browser - Internet radio browser plugin for rhythmbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rhythmbox-radio-browser - Internet radio browser plugin for rhythmbox https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678714 Summary: Review Request: rhythmbox-radio-browser - Internet radio browser plugin for rhythmbox Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: gia...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://giallu.fedorapeople.org/rhythmbox-radio-browser.spec SRPM URL: http://giallu.fedorapeople.org/rhythmbox-radio-browser-2.3.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Rhythmbox plugin that shows the radio station lists of icecast (dir.xiph.org) and shoutcast directly in rhythmbox, so the user can easily search for internet radio stations in rhythmbox and play them. Streams can be recorded too if streamripper is installed -- Configure 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 678714] Review Request: rhythmbox-radio-browser - Internet radio browser plugin for rhythmbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678714 --- Comment #1 from Gianluca Sforna 2011-02-18 18:46:39 EST --- rpmlint messages: rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm rhythmbox-radio-browser.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging rhythmbox-radio-browser.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging rhythmbox-radio-browser.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US icecast -> ice cast, ice-cast, icecap rhythmbox-radio-browser.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xiph -> xiphoid, xiphisternum, xiii rhythmbox-radio-browser.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US shoutcast -> sh outcast, sh-outcast, shout cast rhythmbox-radio-browser.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US streamripper -> stream ripper, stream-ripper, streamliner rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US icecast -> ice cast, ice-cast, icecap rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xiph -> xiphoid, xiphisternum, xiii rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US shoutcast -> sh outcast, sh-outcast, shout cast rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US streamripper -> stream ripper, stream-ripper, streamliner rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: E: no-binary rhythmbox-radio-browser.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib rhythmbox-radio-browser-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 13 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 188380] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188380 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2011-02-18 19:24:00 EST --- perl-Test-Deep-0.096-1.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 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 the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 165572] Review Request: perl-Devel-StackTrace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=165572 --- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-02-18 19:54:37 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure 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 659368] Review Request: luabind - A library that helps create bindings between C++ and Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659368 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-02-18 20:20:41 EST --- luabind-0.9.1-1.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 luabind'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/luabind-0.9.1-1.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 677391] Review Request: lovelock-kde-theme - Lovelock KDE Theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677391 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2011-02-18 21:51:51 EST --- lovelock-kde-theme-14.90.1-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 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 lovelock-kde-theme'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lovelock-kde-theme-14.90.1-1.fc15 -- Configure 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 678727] New: Review Request: pam-afs-session - AFS PAG and AFS tokens on login (sponsor requested)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pam-afs-session - AFS PAG and AFS tokens on login (sponsor requested) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678727 Summary: Review Request: pam-afs-session - AFS PAG and AFS tokens on login (sponsor requested) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ktdre...@ktdreyer.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://adiemus.org/~kdreyer/rpms/pam-afs-session.spec SRPM URL: http://adiemus.org/~kdreyer/rpms/pam-afs-session-2.1-1.src.rpm Description: pam-afs-session is a PAM module intended for use with a Kerberos v5 PAM module to obtain an AFS PAG (Process Authentication Group) and AFS tokens on login. It puts every new session in a PAG regardless of whether it was authenticated with Kerberos and runs a configurable external program to obtain tokens. I would like to get this package into Fedora and EPEL 5. I'm a long-time Fedora user, and I'm looking to be a developer. I maintain a few RPMs at work, but this is my first package in Fedora, so I'm seeking a sponsor. $ rpmlint SPECS/pam-afs-session.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint SRPMS/pam-afs-session-2.1-1.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/i686/pam-afs-session-2.1-1.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/i686/pam-afs-session-debuginfo-2.1-1.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Koji scratch builds: EPEL5: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2850664 F13: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2850668 F14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2850671 F15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2850674 -- Configure 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 678727] Review Request: pam-afs-session - AFS PAG and AFS tokens on login (sponsor requested)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678727 Ken Dreyer 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 678554] Review Request: iceplayer - a simple media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678554 --- Comment #12 from Mike Ma 2011-02-19 00:31:40 EST --- Sorry, I am a new fedora packager. What should I do next? -- Configure 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 678728] New: Review Request: synce-connector - Connection framework and dccm-implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: synce-connector - Connection framework and dccm-implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678728 Summary: Review Request: synce-connector - Connection framework and dccm-implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/synce-connector.spec SRPM URL: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/synce-connector-0.15.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Synce-connector is a connection framework and dccm-implementation for Windows Mobile devices that integrates with HAL or udev. -- Configure 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 678728] Review Request: synce-connector - Connection framework and dccm-implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678728 Andreas Bierfert changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://www.synce.org/ Blocks||498409, 498410, 520875, ||582365 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Bierfert 2011-02-19 00:34:09 EST --- Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2840167 -- Configure 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
