[Bug 671862] Review Request: synapse - A semantic launcher written in Vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671862 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-04-09 03:02:47 --- Comment #28 from Mamoru Tasaka 2011-04-09 03:02:47 EDT --- Please make it sure that synapse will be pushed into stable no faster than libzeitgeist is pushed into stable. (From next time, you can include multiple packages in one push request on bodhi to ensure that those packages are pushed simultaneously) Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676129 --- Comment #22 from Ivan Romanov 2011-04-09 04:32:26 EDT --- How you found this conflict? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 638647] Review Request: mom - Dynamically manage system resources on virtualization hosts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638647 Seb changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sebastien.pas...@heig-vd.ch --- Comment #28 from Seb 2011-04-09 05:06:00 EDT --- Hello, First of all, I appologie about my possible not perfect argumentation and my English skills which are even less than that ;-). I would like to say why I think MOM (Not MOM directly, but the problematics MOM is dealing with) is very important to Fedora and very important for futures and moderns virtualization systems. Actually there is simply not a lot of real solutions to deal efficiently with memory overcommitment. Ballooning and KSM truly working great independently, but together they are sources of many problems and configuration's complications. There is a real need of memory overcommitment management systems and MOM is maybe not the best one, but it's working well and is available. As fedora say in its values "Features First" and (I think) as a "new technologies innovator" being able to purpose to its user an "advanced and efficient virtualization environment" is a necessary objective. A tool like MOM and in a more general way, a working solution to the issues of memory overcommitment in virtualization can be a real and great advantages to Fedora. Another point, today we are dealing with the "green" and the green by one of its definitions mean to use hardware efficiently and to be equipped in a well-balanced manner compared to its need. In this case, be able to deal with memory will help running as many virtual machines as possible (and keeping them working properly, qa, etc.) on a single system. Of course there is also the question of the CPU overcommitment (which tools like niceload or simply nice gives basics workaround, but they are realy not perfect to solve that kinds of problems) still need to be solved. And for all this reason if someone would like to help this project to grown by giving it a chance to be in the fedora world I would be truly grateful to him. A MOM satisfied user Seb -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 522821] Review Request: bluetile - A modern tiling window manager with a gentle learning curve
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522821 --- Comment #32 from Lakshmi Narasimhan 2011-04-09 07:49:38 EDT --- Sorry was away for a while, I will be able to check this on Tuesday. Will report any issues here and would file a defect if necessary. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 680657] Review Request: mpdas - An MPD audioscrobbling client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=680657
--- Comment #7 from Lakshmi Narasimhan 2011-04-09
08:03:41 EDT ---
Hi Ankur,
I checked the spec. Looks fine.
Two issues.
1) There is a tab/space issue which can be fixed.
2) rpmlint warns about very small size of the debuginfo package. I found that
the RPM_OPT_FLAGS are not being honoured when the build is happening and hence
the small size. I built the package using make command, passing the
RPM_OPT_FLAGS and the debuginfo package is around 124-130 KB. rpmlint doesn't
complain about this package.
I made this change to the spec file in %build section
export CXXFLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS && make CONFIG=%{_sysconfdir}
but not sure whether this is the right way to make the build accept the
CXXFLAGS.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676129 --- Comment #23 from Michal Schmidt 2011-04-09 09:00:30 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) > I would use qconf-qt4 binary name by analogue with qmake-qt4. What you think? Yes, qconf-qt4 would be acceptable and the analogy with qmake-qt4 is nice. I had a look at Debian. They renamed the binary to qt-qconf: http://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/qconf/filelist But they also use different naming of qmake than we do... I like qconf-qt4 better. (In reply to comment #22) > How you found this conflict? repoquery -f '*/qconf' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676129 --- Comment #24 from Ivan Romanov 2011-04-09 09:23:39 EDT --- It's fine! ?? - patches should have an upstream bug link or comment - it is unclear to me whether qconf-1.4-optflags.patch is going to be Fedora-specific forever or if it's going to be resolved in the upstream project. I wrote to Justin Karneges (founder of Psi and related projects). And will wait for him answer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 694994] New: Review Request: yoshimi - Rewrite of ZynAddSubFx aiming for better JACK support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: yoshimi - Rewrite of ZynAddSubFx aiming for better JACK support https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694994 Summary: Review Request: yoshimi - Rewrite of ZynAddSubFx aiming for better JACK support Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bl...@verdurin.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/yoshimi/yoshimi.spec SRPM URL: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/yoshimi/yoshimi-0.060.8-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Yoshimi is a rewrite of ZynAddSubFx to improve its compatibility with the Jack Audio Connection Kit. ZynAddSubFX is an open source software synthesizer capable of making a countless number of instrument sounds. It is microtonal, and the instruments made by it sounds like those from professional keyboards. The program has effects like Reverb, Echo, Chorus, Phaser... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 694994] Review Request: yoshimi - Rewrite of ZynAddSubFx aiming for better JACK support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694994 --- Comment #1 from Adam Huffman 2011-04-09 10:08:39 EDT --- rpmlint output: yoshimi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US microtonal -> micro tonal, micro-tonal, microtone The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. yoshimi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US microtonal -> micro tonal, micro-tonal, microtone The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. yoshimi.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. yoshimi.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/yoshimi/banks/chip/.bankdir The file or directory is hidden. You should see if this is normal, and delete it from the package if not. yoshimi.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/yoshimi/banks/chip/.bankdir yoshimi.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary yoshimi Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. I believe the .bankdir file is needed, but will remove it if not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671862] Review Request: synapse - A semantic launcher written in Vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671862 --- Comment #29 from Renich Bon Ciric 2011-04-09 10:41:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #28) > Please make it sure that synapse will be pushed into stable > no faster than libzeitgeist is pushed into stable. > (From next time, you can include multiple packages in one push request > on bodhi to ensure that those packages are pushed simultaneously) > > Closing I will; thanks. Thank you, very much, for all 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 694998] New: Review Request: cufflinks - RNA-Seq transcript assembly, differential expression/regulation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: cufflinks - RNA-Seq transcript assembly, differential expression/regulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694998 Summary: Review Request: cufflinks - RNA-Seq transcript assembly, differential expression/regulation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bl...@verdurin.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/cufflinks/cufflinks.spec SRPM URL: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/cufflinks/cufflinks-0.9.3-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Cufflinks assembles transcripts, estimates their abundances, and tests for differential expression and regulation in RNA-Seq samples. It accepts aligned RNA-Seq reads and assembles the alignments into a parsimonious set of transcripts. Cufflinks then estimates the relative abundances of these transcripts based on how many reads support each one. Cufflinks is a collaborative effort between the Laboratory for Mathematical and Computational Biology, led by Lior Pachter at UC Berkeley, Steven Salzberg's group at the University of Maryland Center for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, and Barbara Wold's lab at Caltech. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 694864] Review Request: php-pecl-gearman - PHP wrapper to libgearman
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694864
--- Comment #3 from Chris Tyler 2011-04-09 11:05:24 EDT ---
Initial review - a few small things need attention:
[Y] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
php-pecl-gearman.i686: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib/php/modules/gearman.so gearman.so
php-pecl-gearman.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libgearman -> Lieberman
php-pecl-gearman.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libgearman ->
Lieberman
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
-> Warnings look acceptable.
[Y] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
.
[Y] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[Y] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
[Y] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[Y] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[N] 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.
-> Add LICENSE file to the %doc line.
[Y] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[Y] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[Y] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
[Y] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[NA for PA] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work
on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[Y] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[NA] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[NA] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[Y] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[NA] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[Y] 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.
[Y] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[Y] 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.
[N] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
-> Don't mix $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot} in the spec file.
[Y] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[NA] 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).
[Y] 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.
[NA] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[NA] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA] 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.
[NA] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[Y] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
[NA] 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
[Bug 694864] Review Request: php-pecl-gearman - PHP wrapper to libgearman
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694864
--- Comment #4 from Chris Tyler 2011-04-09 11:07:49 EDT ---
Correction, spec file doesn't contain %{__rm} but does contain things like
%{__cat}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 640455] Review Request: python-pyro - Pyro is short for PYthon Remote Objects.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=640455 --- Comment #11 from David Hannequin 2011-04-09 12:05:26 EDT --- Hi, New spec file and srpm : Spec URL: http://hvad.fedorapeople.org/fedora/python-pyro/python-pyro.spec SRPM URL: http://hvad.fedorapeople.org/fedora/python-pyro/python-pyro-4.3-1.fc14.src.rpm Best regard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676129 --- Comment #25 from Ivan Romanov 2011-04-09 13:16:37 EDT --- I made patch to rename. Have a look at https://github.com/drizt/psi-plus/blob/9d1791dcf50ecb6980e4070c0575e8eeda192312/qconf-1.4-rename-binary.patch and https://github.com/drizt/psi-plus/blob/0b737ab7752b1d3a0b6b322a9e99e9312916f3c7/qconf.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 674082] Review Request: mchange-commons - A collection of general purpose utilities for c3p0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674082 Sebastian Dziallas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||sebast...@when.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sebast...@when.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from Sebastian Dziallas 2011-04-09 13:42:40 EDT --- Alright, given that both c3p0 and this work now well together, I think we're good to go, especially since it doesn't seem like upstream is moving immediately. Taking 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 678674] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678674 --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka 2011-04-09 13:44:35 EDT --- http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-goocanvas/rubygem-goocanvas.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-goocanvas/rubygem-goocanvas-0.90.8-2.fc.src.rpm * Sun Apr 10 2011 Mamoru Tasaka - 0.90.8-2 - Some cleanups -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 674114] Review Request: rhino-appjet - JavaScript for Java as modified by Appjet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674114 --- Comment #4 from Sebastian Dziallas 2011-04-09 13:46:39 EDT --- I'm trying to figure out how to proceed here. Appjet is its own framework and I'm leaning to argue that it needs its own package. It was part of the initial etherpad package and I'm not sure whether the patch (or porting it) will affect other rhino apps. Can you maybe have a look at the patch? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 687875] Review Request: aarddict - Multi-platform dictionary and offline Wikipedia reader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=687875 --- Comment #2 from PRABIN KUMAR DATTA 2011-04-09 14:59:39 EDT --- Updated: Spec URL: http://prabindatta.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/aarddict.spec SRPM URL: http://prabindatta.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/aarddict-0.9.1-1.fc15.src.rpm Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2988409 rpmlint outputs: SPEC FILE: $ rpmlint -i rpmbuild/SPECS/aarddict.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. RPM FILE: $ rpmlint -i rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aarddict-0.9.1-1.fc15.noarch.rpm aarddict.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Multi -> Mulch, Mufti The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. aarddict.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Aard -> Arad, Ard, Adar The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. aarddict.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary aarddict Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. SRPM FILE: $ rpmlint -i rpmbuild/SRPMS/aarddict-0.9.1-1.fc15.src.rpm aarddict.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Multi -> Mulch, Mufti The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. aarddict.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Aard -> Arad, Ard, Adar The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 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 690360] Review Request: weave - Firefox Registration/Sync Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690360
--- Comment #5 from Chris Tyler 2011-04-09 15:46:45 EDT ---
Release 3 spec doesn't work with the release 2 sources and no SRPM was
provided, so I used the release 2 SRPM for an initial review:
[Y] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[Y] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
.
[Y] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[Y] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[Y] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[?] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
-> How do you know the actual license?
[NA] 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.
[Y] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[Y] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[N] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
-> Is the tarball not directly obtainable from the upstream source? If so, give
the URL to the upstream location.
[Y] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[NA for PA] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work
on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[Y] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[Y] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[Y] 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.
[Y] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[NA] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[N] 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.
-> Package does not own /usr/share/weave but should (directory is exclusive to
this package)
[N] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
-> file listed twice: /etc/httpd/conf.d/weave.conf
[Y] 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.
[N] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
-> Do not use both $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot} in the spec file.
[Y] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[NA] 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).
[Y] 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.
[NA] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[NA] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA] 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.
[NA] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[Y] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
[NA] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with
[Bug 695022] New: Review Request: pygtkhelpers - assists the building of PyGTK applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pygtkhelpers - assists the building of PyGTK applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695022 Summary: Review Request: pygtkhelpers - assists the building of PyGTK applications Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: l...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://lzap.fedorapeople.org/fedora-packaging/pygtkhelpers/0.4.2-1/pygtkhelpers.spec SRPM URL: http://lzap.fedorapeople.org/fedora-packaging/pygtkhelpers/0.4.2-1/pygtkhelpers-0.4.2-1.f15.src.rpm Description: PyGTKHelpers is a library to assist the building of PyGTK applications. It is intentionally designed to be non-frameworky, and blend well with your particular style of PyGTK development. $ rpmlint pygtkhelpers-0.4.2-1.f15.src.rpm pygtkhelpers.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frameworky -> framework, frameworks, framework y 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint pygtkhelpers-0.4.2-1.fc14.i686.rpm pygtkhelpers.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frameworky -> framework, frameworks, framework y pygtkhelpers.i686: E: no-binary 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2988564 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671862] Review Request: synapse - A semantic launcher written in Vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671862 --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System 2011-04-09 16:47:36 EDT --- synapse-0.2.6-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/synapse-0.2.6-1.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 695026] New: Review Request: opendict - free multiplatform dictionary program.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: opendict - free multiplatform dictionary program. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695026 Summary: Review Request: opendict - free multiplatform dictionary program. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: auri...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/a/a7/Opendict.spec SRPM URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/3/3f/Opendict-0.6.3-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: OpenDict is free multiplatform dictionary program. It is made to be universal and easy to use for desktop users and developers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 695027] Review Request: opendict-lingvosoft - Online dictionary plugins for opendict.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695027 --- Comment #1 from Aurimas Černius 2011-04-09 16:55:33 EDT --- This package contains plugins for OpenDict, which is submitted in bug 695026. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 695027] New: Review Request: opendict-lingvosoft - Online dictionary plugins for opendict.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: opendict-lingvosoft - Online dictionary plugins for opendict. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695027 Summary: Review Request: opendict-lingvosoft - Online dictionary plugins for opendict. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: auri...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/d/d3/Opendict-lingvosoft.spec SRPM URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/4/4a/Opendict-lingvosoft-0.8-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: This is LingvoSoft Online Dictionaries plugin for OpenDict dictionary. It fetches translations from http://www.lingvozone.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 695026] Review Request: opendict - free multiplatform dictionary program.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695026 --- Comment #1 from Aurimas Černius 2011-04-09 16:57:53 EDT --- Since as stand-alone program it has limited value, I think that plugins from bug 695027 should be made as requirement for this package. I haven't done that yet. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 684407] Review Request: perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio - Perl interface to Monotone via automate stdio
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684407 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio |perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio |-0.12-1.fc14|-0.12-1.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 684407] Review Request: perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio - Perl interface to Monotone via automate stdio
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684407 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-04-09 17:17:42 EDT --- perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio-0.12-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 684416] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-SourceView - Perl wrappers for the GtkSourceView widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684416 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-04-09 17:19:09 EDT --- perl-Gtk2-SourceView-1.000-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 684416] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-SourceView - Perl wrappers for the GtkSourceView widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684416 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-04-09 17:17:55 EDT --- perl-Gtk2-SourceView-1.000-1.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 684407] Review Request: perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio - Perl interface to Monotone via automate stdio
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684407 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2011-04-09 17:18:41 EDT --- perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio-0.12-1.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 684407] Review Request: perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio - Perl interface to Monotone via automate stdio
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684407 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio |perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio |-0.12-1.fc15|-0.12-1.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 684416] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-SourceView - Perl wrappers for the GtkSourceView widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684416 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Gtk2-SourceView-1.000- |perl-Gtk2-SourceView-1.000- |1.fc15 |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 684416] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-SourceView - Perl wrappers for the GtkSourceView widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684416 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Gtk2-SourceView-1.000- |perl-Gtk2-SourceView-1.000- |1.fc13 |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 693493] Review Request: thunderbird-lightning - The calendar extension to Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693493 --- Comment #8 from Christopher Aillon 2011-04-09 19:43:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > > thunderbird-lightning-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package > > I'm a bit at a loss. This appears to be because libcalbasecomps.so is getting > stripped by the mozilla build/install process, but I can't figure out where. > Any help would be appreciated. -make -f client.mk build +make -f client.mk build STRIP=/bin/true -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693493] Review Request: thunderbird-lightning - The calendar extension to Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693493 --- Comment #9 from Christopher Aillon 2011-04-09 19:57:48 EDT --- A few more comments: * I don't think you need to worry about official branding vs not for this package, so can probably take out that macro and related blocks. * You may wish to consider installing the .xpi instead of unpacking it. It should lead to a slightly faster startup time for Thunderbird. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 482757] Review Request: objcryst-fox - Viewing and solving crystal structures from powder diffraction data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=482757 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||da...@gnsa.us Flag||needinfo?(pascal22p@parois. ||net) --- Comment #16 from David Nalley 2011-04-09 23:34:22 EDT --- Pascal are you still interested in this packaging this?? I'll be happy to work to sponsor you if you are. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693425] Review Request: openerp - OpenERP business application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693425 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||da...@gnsa.us --- Comment #20 from David Nalley 2011-04-09 23:30:21 EDT --- Just a fair warning - you have at least two (I really quickly ran over the source, there may be many more that I didn't find) bundled libraries in source. These will need to be broken out and packaged separately (actually they may already exist, which will make your job much easier) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries You've also got a VERY complex spec file, especially with it being the first package you've submitted for review, and I question the need for a lot of that complexity. Also, keep in mind that the purpose of the spec file is to install the software, not to install and configure, using chkconfig to manipulate other packages and other things like that are frowned upon. Sorry for seeming all negative, I really am excited about openERP dedicating the resources to do this work, and I'll be happy to help you get it in Fedora/EPEL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 694994] Review Request: yoshimi - Rewrite of ZynAddSubFx aiming for better JACK support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694994
Brendan Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brendan.jones...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones 2011-04-09
23:35:27 EDT ---
Hi Adam,
thanks for packaging this. Here's an informal review:
+ OK
- N/A
! Problem
? Not evaluated
fedora15:/home/Documents$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-15-x86_64/result/yoshimi-0.060.8-1.fc15.src.rpm
yoshimi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US microtonal -> micro tonal,
micro-tonal, microbial
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Required
[+] named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[+] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[+] Meet the Packaging Guidelines
*** (optional): no longer need %clean/cleaning of the buildroot in %install
unless building for F12 and below or EPEL
[+] Be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing
Guidelines
[!] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license
*** source includes header comments from ZynAddSubFX stating GPLv2+
[!] License file must be included in %doc
*** COPYING file must be included in %doc, as well ass 0.60.8.notes
[+] The spec file must be written in American English
[+] The spec file for the package MUST be legible
[+] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source
[+] Successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary
architecture
[-] Proper use of ExcludeArch
[+] All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
*** consider adding hicolor-icon-theme to Requires
[+] The spec file MUST handle locales properly
[-] Shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's
default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
[+] 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, along with the rationalization for relocation
of that specific package
[+] A package must own all directories that it creates
directories under this
[!] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings
*** You only require %{_datadir}/%{name} - it encompasses sub-directories
[+] Permissions on files must be set properly. Every %files section must
include a %defattr(...) line
[+] Each package must consistently use macros
[+] The package must contain code, or permissable content
[-] Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
[+] If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application
[-] Header files must be in a -devel package
[-] Static libraries must be in a -static package
[-] library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package
[-] devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency
[-] Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives
[!] GUI apps must include a %{name}.desktop file, properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section
*** Gnome uses "Comment" whereas KDE uses "GenericName". Should these be the
same?
[+] Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages
[+] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8
Should Items
[-] the packager SHOULD query upstream for any missing license text files to
include it
[-] Non-English language support for description and summary sections in the
package spec if available
[-] The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock
[-] The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures
[+] The reviewer should test that the package functions as described
[+] If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane
[-] Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using
a fully versioned dependency
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) should usually 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
[-] Should contain man pages for binaries/scripts
*** no man pages in upstream 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 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||da...@gnsa.us Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution||NOTABUG Status Whiteboard|BuildFails |StalledSubmitter Last Closed||2011-04-09 23:49:41 --- Comment #23 from David Nalley 2011-04-09 23:49:41 EDT --- tibbs it's been 6 months, I am going to clear FE-NEEDSPONSOR (and the whiteboard) and add FE-DEADREVIEW and close this ticket. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 687875] Review Request: aarddict - Multi-platform dictionary and offline Wikipedia reader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=687875
David Nalley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||da...@gnsa.us
--- Comment #3 from David Nalley 2011-04-10 00:06:01 EDT ---
When you make changes, please increment release and annotate your changes in
the changelog.
This is unnecessary, and in fact improper,:
%doc LICENSE doc/*
It should be:
%doc LICENSE
I think the following:
%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/*.*
%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/icons/*
%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/locale/qt_el.qm
%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/locale/qt_ru.qm
could be reduced to:
%{python_sitelib}/%{name}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 689685] Review Request: Anchorman - The recording-studio-in-a-box
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=689685 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||da...@gnsa.us --- Comment #6 from David Nalley 2011-04-10 00:23:05 EDT --- You don't need gcc-c++ as a BR: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 584090] Review Request: mashpodde - mashpodder is a podcatching client based on BashPodder
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=584090 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||da...@gnsa.us Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution||NOTABUG Status Whiteboard|NotReady| Last Closed||2011-04-10 00:31:08 --- Comment #11 from David Nalley 2011-04-10 00:31:08 EDT --- There was no response to Michael's ping on this or any response from packager for almost a year. Closing this as a dead 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 584111] Review Request: cmatrix - Simulate the display from "The Matrix"
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=584111 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||da...@gnsa.us Flag||needinfo?(ayush.hakmn@gmail ||.com) --- Comment #23 from David Nalley 2011-04-10 00:38:54 EDT --- Ayush: Have you done any informal reviews as suggested several months ago?? Please provide links here if you have. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 673784] Rename Request: mingw32-filesystem -> mingw-filesystem - Cross compiler base filesystem and environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673784 Tim Mayberry changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mojof...@gmail.com --- Comment #18 from Tim Mayberry 2011-04-10 02:36:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) > After discussion with some members of the Fedora MinGW SIG we decided to drop > the 'cross-*' prefix for now and stick with 'mingw-*' as prefix. Support for > Mac OS X may take a long while to get ready (possible even never because of > the > legal issues), so we can use 'mingw-*' for now. We've also filed a ticket at > the Fedora Packaging Committee with a request to approve the (updated) draft > guidelines: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/71 > > Updated package: > Spec URL: > http://svn.openftd.org/svn/fedora_cross/mingw-filesystem/mingw-filesystem.spec > SRPM URL: > http://ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw-filesystem-66-1.fc15.src.rpm > Hi, I've been trying out the new cross compiler framework from the repository located at: http://build1.openftd.org/fedora-cross/fedora-cross.repo on Fedora 14 I got an error when trying to install mingw32-curl saying there was a missing provides(wldap32.dll). So I added Provides: mingw32(wldap32.dll) to the mingw32-filesystem package(and similarly for the mingw64-filesystem package) and after rebuilding, curl would install fine. Looking at the changelog: * Thu Nov 13 2008 Richard Jones - 35-1 - Added mingw32(wldap32.dll) pseudo-provides. So it seems like it was there at some point but nothing in the changelog indicating why it is no longer. Anyway, hope this is relevant and 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
