[Bug 703464] Review Request: google-gson - conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 --- Comment #3 from Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 02:05:11 EDT --- Thanks a lot! Actually I got few example SRPMs from Stanislav Ochotnicky. He gave me many hints how to deal with java packaging. I'll fix the CR+LF endings 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 611054] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework 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=611054 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||methe...@gmail.com Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE --- Comment #10 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 02:43:26 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 673637 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework 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=673637 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #5 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 02:43:26 EDT --- *** Bug 611054 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 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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 642208] Review Request: mingw32-win-iconv - iconv implementation using Win32 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208 Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ka...@smartlink.ee Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2011-05-11 02:52:29 EDT --- No feedback to the mail, so I guess lets give it a try. I'm approving the package based on Amorilia's review. Thanks Amorilia! Erik, if you want to simplify some things in the spec file, then the BuildRoot tag, the 'rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT' at the beginning of %install, the whole %clean section, and the default %defattrs are no longer needed with current Fedora releases. Also, the Obsoletes and Provides currently have %dist macro in them; it's more common to leave that out, since the 'mingw32-iconv 1.12-14' comparison would already match the current 'mingw32-iconv-1.12-13.fc15' package: Obsoletes: mingw32-iconv 1.12-14 Provides: mingw32-iconv = 1.12-14 But these are all things one would do during the normal maintenance of a package and not blocking the review. 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 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 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 02:53:50 EDT --- anchorman-0.0.1-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/anchorman-0.0.1-1.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 684835] Review Request: deltacloud-core - Deltacloud REST API 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=684835 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 03:22:55 EDT --- deltacloud-core-0.3.0-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/deltacloud-core-0.3.0-3.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 684835] Review Request: deltacloud-core - Deltacloud REST API 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=684835 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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 684835] Review Request: deltacloud-core - Deltacloud REST API 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=684835 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 03:22:10 EDT --- deltacloud-core-0.3.0-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/deltacloud-core-0.3.0-3.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 703464] Review Request: google-gson - conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 --- Comment #4 from Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 03:35:27 EDT --- Second release is available here ... Spec URL: http://tavvva.net/files/redhat/google-gson/2/google-gson.spec SRPM URL: http://tavvva.net/files/redhat/google-gson/2/google-gson-1.7.1-2.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 700345] Review Request: inamik-tableformatter - A set of Java classes to print text in tabulated form
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=700345
--- Comment #6 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-05-11
03:39:22 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
inamik-tableformatter.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
com.inamik.utils.tableformatter-0.96.2-src.tar.gz
OK. Upstream has some strange checks.
[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: GPLv2+
[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.
[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.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[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.
[-] 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
[-] Package uses %global not %define
[-] 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)
[-] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[-] pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom
file (use JPP. and JPP- correctly)
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] 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)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
=== Issues ===
1. Single small issue - missing license in the javadoc subpackage
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701932] Review Request: emacs-pymacs - Emacs and Python integration framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701932 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-05-11 03:38:59 --- Comment #6 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 03:38:59 EDT --- Thanks for review and repos. Package built for rawhide and f15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=243445 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=243444 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703464] Review Request: google-gson - conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 03:42:14 EDT --- Thanks, 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 703464] Review Request: google-gson - conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #6 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 03:44:27 EDT --- Sponsored. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703392] Review Request: perl-threads-lite - Actor model threading for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703392 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-threads-lite-0.030-1.f ||c16 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-05-11 03:45:27 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703719] New: Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703719 Summary: Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice client Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: phat...@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://www.stud.fit.vutbr.cz/~xhatin01/spice-xpi/spice-xpi.spec SRPM URL: http://www.stud.fit.vutbr.cz/~xhatin01/spice-xpi/spice-xpi-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Hi, I would like to have this new package reviewed. Spice-xpi is NPAPI based web browser extension, which allows to run spice client from browser. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703461] Review Request: perl-threads-tbb - Interface to the Threading Building Blocks (TBB) API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703461 Bug 703461 depends on bug 703456, which changed state. Bug 703456 Summary: Review Request: perl-Scriptalicious - Make scripts more delicious to system administrators https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703456 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703456] Review Request: perl-Scriptalicious - Make scripts more delicious to system administrators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703456 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Scriptalicious-1.16-1. ||fc16 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-05-11 04:00:52 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703720] Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice 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=703720 Peter Hatina phat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703720] New: Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703720 Summary: Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice client Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: phat...@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://www.stud.fit.vutbr.cz/~xhatin01/spice-xpi/spice-xpi.spec SRPM URL: http://www.stud.fit.vutbr.cz/~xhatin01/spice-xpi/spice-xpi-2.5-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Hi, I would like to have this new package reviewed. Spice-xpi is NPAPI based web browser extension, which allows to run spice client from browser. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703721] New: Review Request: sound-theme-acoustic - A contribution to Fedora Sounds project.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sound-theme-acoustic - A contribution to Fedora Sounds project. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703721 Summary: Review Request: sound-theme-acoustic - A contribution to Fedora Sounds project. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: anujmo...@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: http://anujmore.fedorapeople.org/sounds/sound-theme-acoustic.spec SRPM URL: http://anujmore.fedorapeople.org/sounds/sound-theme-acoustic-1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Fedora Sounds sound theme titled 'Acoustic'. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703719] Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice 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=703719 --- Comment #1 from Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il 2011-05-11 04:19:46 EDT --- *** Bug 703720 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 703721] Review Request: sound-theme-acoustic - Sound theme made on an acoustic guitar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703721 AnujMore anujmo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |sound-theme-acoustic - A|sound-theme-acoustic - |contribution to Fedora |Sound theme made on an |Sounds project. |acoustic guitar -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703720] Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice 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=703720 Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||el...@doom.co.il Resolution||DUPLICATE Last Closed||2011-05-11 04:19:46 --- Comment #1 from Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il 2011-05-11 04:19:46 EDT --- -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 703719 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701369] Review Request: ghc-json - Haskell JSON 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=701369 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 04:27:46 EDT --- Imported and built for f16, f15, and f14. Also fixed the points raised in the review - 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 701369] Review Request: ghc-json - Haskell JSON 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=701369 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:33:07 EDT --- ghc-json-0.4.4-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-json-0.4.4-2.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 701369] Review Request: ghc-json - Haskell JSON 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=701369 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:32:58 EDT --- ghc-json-0.4.4-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-json-0.4.4-2.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 703464] Review Request: google-gson - conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 --- Comment #7 from Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 04:33:16 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: google-gson Short Description: Java lib for conversion of Java objects into JSON representation Owners: jcapik Branches: f15 InitialCC: java-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 703464] Review Request: google-gson - Java lib for conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: google-gson |Review Request: google-gson |- conversion of Java|- Java lib for conversion |objects into JSON |of Java objects into JSON |representation |representation -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702692] Review Request: perl-Test-CheckChanges - Check that the Changes file matches the distribution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702692 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:38:19 EDT --- perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.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 702692] Review Request: perl-Test-CheckChanges - Check that the Changes file matches the distribution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702692 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:38:12 EDT --- perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703464] Review Request: google-gson - Java lib for conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702692] Review Request: perl-Test-CheckChanges - Check that the Changes file matches the distribution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702692 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:38:34 EDT --- perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.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 702692] Review Request: perl-Test-CheckChanges - Check that the Changes file matches the distribution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702692 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:38:26 EDT --- perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.el4 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 4. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702692] Review Request: perl-Test-CheckChanges - Check that the Changes file matches the distribution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702692 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:38:04 EDT --- perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Test-CheckChanges-0.14-2.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702692] Review Request: perl-Test-CheckChanges - Check that the Changes file matches the distribution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702692 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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 702692] Review Request: perl-Test-CheckChanges - Check that the Changes file matches the distribution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702692 --- Comment #11 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org 2011-05-11 04:42:44 EDT --- EL-6 build is failing due to missing Test::Exception, which should be in RHEL-6 server optional channel. https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4604 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703464] Review Request: google-gson - Java lib for conversion of Java objects into JSON representation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703464 Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|unspecified |medium -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703719] Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice 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=703719 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||hdego...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hdego...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 04:45:13 EDT --- I'll review this and if all goes well sponsor Peter, assigning to me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703719] Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice 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=703719 Peter Hatina phat...@redhat.com 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 703720] Review Request: spice-xpi - mozilla extension for spice 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=703720 Peter Hatina phat...@redhat.com 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 695281] Review Request: perl-Devel-EnforceEncapsulation - Find access violations to blessed 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=695281 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Devel-EnforceEncapsula ||tion-0.50-3.fc16 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-05-11 04:46:12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 698251] Review Request: perl-B-Hooks-OP-PPAddr - Hook into opcode execution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=698251 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-B-Hooks-OP-PPAddr-0.03 ||-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 701343] Review Request: ghc-pandoc-types - Pandoc data structure 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=701343 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:59:28 EDT --- ghc-pandoc-types-1.8-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-pandoc-types-1.8-2.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 701343] Review Request: ghc-pandoc-types - Pandoc data structure 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=701343 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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 701343] Review Request: ghc-pandoc-types - Pandoc data structure 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=701343 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 04:59:41 EDT --- ghc-pandoc-types-1.8-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-pandoc-types-1.8-2.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 703721] Review Request: sound-theme-acoustic - Sound theme made on an acoustic guitar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703721 Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il 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 684835] Review Request: deltacloud-core - Deltacloud REST API 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=684835 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 06:12:33 EDT --- deltacloud-core-0.3.0-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/deltacloud-core-0.3.0-4.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 700667] Review Request python26-crypto
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=700667 --- Comment #10 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 06:13:13 EDT --- I'm not sure what to do next on this issue. Do I need to post a spec / srpm with either Paul's patch or mine applied? Does anyone have feedback on my patch? 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 703721] [FE-NEEDSPONSOR] Review Request: sound-theme-acoustic - Sound theme made on an acoustic guitar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703721 AnujMore anujmo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |[FE-NEEDSPONSOR] Review |sound-theme-acoustic - |Request: |Sound theme made on an |sound-theme-acoustic - |acoustic guitar |Sound theme made on an ||acoustic guitar -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703721] Review Request: sound-theme-acoustic - Sound theme made on an acoustic guitar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703721 AnujMore anujmo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[FE-NEEDSPONSOR] Review |Review Request: |Request:|sound-theme-acoustic - |sound-theme-acoustic - |Sound theme made on an |Sound theme made on an |acoustic guitar |acoustic guitar | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703824] New: Review Request python26-paramiko for EPEL 5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request python26-paramiko for EPEL 5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703824 Summary: Review Request python26-paramiko for EPEL 5 Product: Fedora EPEL Version: el5 Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: agr...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: tcall...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com, l...@jcomserv.net, gho...@fedoraproject.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Submitting as a separate package after discussion in bz 702677 Still dependent on bz 700667 SPEC: http://www.grimmslanding.org/rpms/python26-paramiko.spec SRPM: http://www.grimmslanding.org/rpms/python26-paramiko-1.7.6-1.el5.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 701184] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RequireSSL - Force SSL in specified pages or modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701184 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmasl...@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 701184] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RequireSSL - Force SSL in specified pages or modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701184
Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 07:14:56
EDT ---
- rpmlint OK
- package must be named according to Guidelines OK
- spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK
- package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK
- package must be licensed with Fedora approved license OK
- license field must match actual license OK
- text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK
- sources must match the upstream source OK
- package MUST successfully compile and build OK
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3065771
- architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK
- build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
- handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK
- shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK
- packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK
- package must own all directories that it creates OK
- permissions on files must be set properly OK
- package must consistently use macros OK
- package must contain code, or permissable content OK
- large documentation must go in a -doc OK
- %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK
- header files must be in a -devel package OK
- static libraries must be in a -static package OK
- library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK
- devel package usually require base package OK
- packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK
- GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK
- packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK
rpm -qp --provides
~/Downloads/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RequireSSL-0.04-1.fc15.noarch.rpm
perl(CGI::Application::Plugin::RequireSSL) = 0.04
perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RequireSSL = 0.04-1.fc15
rpm -qp --requires
~/Downloads/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RequireSSL-0.04-1.fc15.noarch.rpm
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1
perl(Attribute::Handlers)
perl(base)
perl(Carp)
perl(Data::Dumper)
perl(Exporter)
perl(strict)
perl(warnings)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1
Note: rm -rf and deffattr are not needed any more.
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 703178] Review Request: rubygem-declarative_authorization - The declarative_authorization plug in provides readable auth rules for Rails.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703178 --- Comment #2 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 07:24:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) I'll take this as well as bug 703248 (actually I overlooked this in the NEW RR list). It looks that the issues mentioned in bug 703248 were already addressed. However, it fails to build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3064358 Maybe I'm misreading the log, but it looks like the build failure isn't due to the RPM or specfile but something on the build system itself: + cd /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/declarative_authorization-0.5.2 /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.K4xWdp: line 29: cd: /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/declarative_authorization-0.5.2: No such file or directory RPM build errors: error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.K4xWdp (%check) Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.K4xWdp (%check) Child returncode was: 1 EXCEPTION: Command failed. See logs for output. # ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target noarch --nodeps builddir/build/SPECS/rubygem-declarative_authorization.spec'] Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mock/trace_decorator.py, line 70, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mock/util.py, line 325, in do raise mock.exception.Error, (Command failed. See logs for output.\n # %s % (command,), child.returncode) Error: Command failed. See logs for output. # ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target noarch --nodeps builddir/build/SPECS/rubygem-declarative_authorization.spec'] LEAVE do -- EXCEPTION RAISED I can build the RPM both from spec and SRPM locally without a problem. So is this something I can fix or something that needs to be fixed in Koji? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703248] Review Request: rubygem-foreigner - Foreign keys for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703248
--- Comment #4 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 07:27:20
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Thanks for quick update. Now it looks fine. APPROVED.
My pleasure, and thank you for reviewing the package so quickly. :)
Minor suggestion related to 3 is that now README.rdoc is not marked as %doc.
Perhaps you might want to do something like the following in %files, if you
don't think it's too much :)
%dir %{geminstdir}
%{geminstdir}/lib
%doc %{geminstdir}/MIT-LICENSE
%doc %{geminstdir}/README.rdoc
%{geminstdir}/Rakefile
%{geminstdir}/test
Not too much at all. I won't claim to be an expert at packaging, so appreciate
the tip I've added those changes as part of the first official release. :)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703248] Review Request: rubygem-foreigner - Foreign keys for Rails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703248 Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 07:31:08 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-foreigner Short Description: Adds helpers to migrations and correctly dumps foreign keys to schema.rb. Owners: mcpierce Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: mcpierce -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703322] Review Request: tpp - text presentation 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=703322 --- Comment #2 from Jesus M. Rodriguez jes...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 08:48:04 EDT --- UGH sorry that's what I get for copy and pasting :( is $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ok? I prefer to use that one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703322] Review Request: tpp - text presentation 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=703322 --- Comment #3 from Jesus M. Rodriguez jes...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 08:51:24 EDT --- Updated spec to use just $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. http://jmrodri.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/tpp-1.3.1-4.fc14.src.rpm http://jmrodri.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/tpp.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 702103] Review Request: python-osmgpsmap - Python bindings for osm-gps-map GTK+ 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=702103 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey C. Ollie j...@ocjtech.us 2011-05-11 08:55:15 EDT --- Now that osm-gps-map has been approved, here's a scratch build of the python bindings: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3065939 Spec URL: http://jcollie.fedorapeople.org/python-osmgpsmap.spec SRPM URL: http://jcollie.fedorapeople.org/python-osmgpsmap-0.7.3-2.fc16.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 697411] Review Request: perl-Data-Alias - Comprehensive set of aliasing operations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697411 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-05-11 09:01:53 --- Comment #11 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 09:01:53 EDT --- Ticket 4684 is fixed, Data::Alias unblocked for f15+. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 684835] Review Request: deltacloud-core - Deltacloud REST API 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=684835 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 09:40:17 EDT --- deltacloud-core-0.3.0-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/deltacloud-core-0.3.0-4.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 700667] Review Request python26-crypto
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=700667 --- Comment #11 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org 2011-05-11 09:51:29 EDT --- I've updated python-crypto in Rawhide to use upstream's re-rolled tarball and to get rid of macros for system commands. Rebase your spec on that and then I'll review it when I can find a few spare jiffies. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702892] Review Request: python-modjkapi - API for modjk 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=702892 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com 2011-05-11 10:26:17 EDT --- I'll go ahead and review this. Look for a full review hopefully later today. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624705] Review Request: pam_script - execute scripts from within pam
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624705 --- Comment #8 from Marcus Moeller marcus.moel...@gmx.ch 2011-05-11 10:34:45 EDT --- fixed post Scripts to install the correct policy package. http://mmoeller.fedorapeople.org/build/pam_script/1.1.4-7/pam_script.spec http://mmoeller.fedorapeople.org/build/pam_script/1.1.4-6/pam_script-1.1.4-7.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 703367] Review Request: sxiv - Simple (or small or suckless) X Image Viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703367 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||socho...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|socho...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 11:14:13 EDT --- I am going to do the 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 701284] Review Request: python-py2pack - Generate distribution packages from Python packages on PyPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701284 Jerome Soyer sai...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-05-11 11:29:58 --- Comment #9 from Jerome Soyer sai...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 11:29:58 EDT --- 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 703367] Review Request: sxiv - Simple (or small or suckless) X Image Viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703367
--- Comment #2 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2011-05-11
11:28:17 EDT ---
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) suckless - suckles, luckless,
suck less
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US feh - eh, fee, fen
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qiv - qi, iv, riv
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xlib - lib, glib, x lib
sxiv-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) suckless - suckles, luckless, suck
less
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US feh - eh, fee, fen
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qiv - qi, iv, riv
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xlib - lib, glib, x lib
sxiv.src: W: invalid-url Source0: sxiv-0.8.1.tar.bz2
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 9 warnings.
Please read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Debuginfo for
info on fixing your debuginfo
OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. .
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
NOTOK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
Actual license is GPLv2+
OK: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
OK: All independent sub-packages have License of their own (if it exists)
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
?: 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.
You should use github tarballs, they are not stable as far as checksums are
concerned.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation
of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a
blocker.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a
directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that
directory.
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of
large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly
if it is not present.
OK: Header files must be in a -devel package.
OK: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
OK: 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.
OK: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package
using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
OK: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they
[Bug 700667] Review Request python26-crypto
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=700667 --- Comment #12 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 11:38:53 EDT --- Ah, I did see the comment in email about macros longer than the things they replace. :-) So now we have: SPEC: http://www.grimmslanding.org/rpms/python26-crypto.spec SRPM: http://www.grimmslanding.org/rpms/python26-crypto-2.3-5.el5.src.rpm Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703367] Review Request: sxiv - Simple (or small or suckless) X Image Viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703367 --- Comment #4 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 11:39:18 EDT --- A small addition. You should also install desktop file with NoDisplay set so that sxiv doesn't appear in the menus, but is able to be added for handling files. http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/desktop-entry-spec-1.0.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703367] Review Request: sxiv - Simple (or small or suckless) X Image Viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703367
--- Comment #3 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 11:36:01 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) suckless - suckles, luckless,
suck less
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US feh - eh, fee, fen
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qiv - qi, iv, riv
sxiv.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xlib - lib, glib, x lib
sxiv-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) suckless - suckles, luckless, suck
less
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US feh - eh, fee, fen
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qiv - qi, iv, riv
sxiv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xlib - lib, glib, x lib
sxiv.src: W: invalid-url Source0: sxiv-0.8.1.tar.bz2
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 9 warnings.
Please read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Debuginfo for
info on fixing your debuginfo
Strange. I'll look into that...
OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. .
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
NOTOK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
Actual license is GPLv2+
Indeed.
OK: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
OK: All independent sub-packages have License of their own (if it exists)
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
?: 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.
You should use github tarballs, they are not stable as far as checksums are
concerned.
Indeed. I'll use https://github.com/downloads/muennich/sxiv/sxiv-0.8.1.tar.gz
instead my custom snapshot.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that
are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion
of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation
of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a
blocker.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a
directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create
that
directory.
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of
large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly
if it is not present.
OK: Header files must be in a -devel package.
OK: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
OK: 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
[Bug 702892] Review Request: python-modjkapi - API for modjk 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=702892 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com 2011-05-11 11:55:02 EDT --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPLv3+) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 72a6c9e090ca7ef20366a22235c658f7 modjkapi-0.1.2.28.tar.gz 72a6c9e090ca7ef20366a22235c658f7 modjkapi-0.1.2.28.tar.gz.orig OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should function as described. OK - Should have sane scriptlets. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. The /usr/bin/bleeder binary seems oddly named. Is there some history there? 2. rpmlint says: python-modjkapi.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bleeder python-modjkapi.src: W: strange-permission modjkapi-0.1.2.28.tar.gz 0660L Might set the perms to 644? Or might be something odd on my end. The man page warning you can ignore, but of course it's nice to add a man page too. ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703367] Review Request: sxiv - Simple (or small or suckless) X Image Viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703367 --- Comment #5 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 12:03:18 EDT --- All should be fixed now. SPEC: http://psabata.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/sxiv/sxiv.spec SRPM: http://psabata.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/sxiv/sxiv-0.8.1-2.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 696357] Review Request: fedora-logo-gnome-shell-extension - adds a Fedora logo to Gnome shell's Activities button
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=696357 --- Comment #6 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 12:44:23 EDT --- Sorry (again!) for this late answer. The package is indeed OK. Just two minor points to fix: - set the version-release in the first entry of the changelog according to the ones defined in the .spec (fixed string : « * Sun Apr 10 2011 Timur Kristóf ven...@msn.com 1.0-2 »). - the description is limited to 80 characters per line, not less. You have space enough to set it in two lines ^^. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701031] Review Request: zeitgeist-datahub - The zeitgeist engine data logger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701031 Deji Akingunola dakin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Deji Akingunola dakin...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 15:09:51 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: zeitgeist-datahub Short Description: The zeitgeist engine data logger Owners: deji Branches: f14 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 702892] Review Request: python-modjkapi - API for modjk 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=702892 --- Comment #3 from Tim Bielawa tbiel...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 15:25:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Spec URL remains the same: http://people.redhat.com/~tbielawa/modjkapi/python-modjkapi.spec SRPM changed to: http://people.redhat.com/~tbielawa/modjkapi/releases/modjkapi-latest/python-modjkapi-0.1.2.28-7.fc14.src.rpm Issues: 1. The /usr/bin/bleeder binary seems oddly named. Is there some history there? Heh, when used in context the name made more sense. It 'bleeds off connections' from a node in a load balancer pool, before removing the node -- but it also reenables nodes. I've renamed it to something more descriptive: 'jk-rotate' because 'gracefully putting nodes into and out of rotation' is an easier concept to grok. 2. rpmlint says: python-modjkapi.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bleeder python-modjkapi.src: W: strange-permission modjkapi-0.1.2.28.tar.gz 0660L Might set the perms to 644? Or might be something odd on my end. Indeed, my umask was creating the sdist with those perms. This time before I built the srpm I manually set the perms to the recommended 0644. The man page warning you can ignore... Never ...but of course it's nice to add a man page too. ;) I agree. Therefore I have added a man page, as per your suggestion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701426] Review Request: python-taboot - Client utility for scripted multi-system administration over Func
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701426 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com 2011-05-11 15:44:33 EDT --- I don't see any further blockers here, so this package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702892] Review Request: python-modjkapi - API for modjk 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=702892 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com 2011-05-11 15:43:57 EDT --- Excellent. That addresses everything I see, so this package is APPROVED. I will go ahead and sponsor you. You can continue the process from: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner Please do let me know if you have any questions, either via email or catch me on irc (nick: nirik). Welcome to the fun! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702892] Review Request: python-modjkapi - API for modjk 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=702892 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com 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 691189] Review Request: wmbinclock - Dockapp which shows the actual system time as binary clock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691189 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 17:29:53 EDT --- wmbinclock-0.5-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wmbinclock-0.5-2.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 691189] Review Request: wmbinclock - Dockapp which shows the actual system time as binary clock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691189 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-05-11 17:29:45 EDT --- wmbinclock-0.5-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wmbinclock-0.5-2.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 691189] Review Request: wmbinclock - Dockapp which shows the actual system time as binary clock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691189 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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 701801] Review Request: ast - A Library for Handling World Coordinate Systems in Astronomy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701801 --- Comment #1 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 18:19:13 EDT --- Hi, some comments: * The description is too long. I haven't found a guideline about this but IMHO with less than 10 lines is enough. Consider that $ rpm -qi ast outputs almost two screens full of text, hiding the rpm information. * The upstream version of the package is 5.6-0. What do you thonk of translating this to 5.6.0-1 instead of 5.6-1? If upstream releases 5.6-3 you will have to edit the Source macro to get the correct source. (Weird versioning, by the way) * Source should contain a full URL * Everything inside /usr/share/ast is documentation and is not needed to work with the libraries. As such, I think the contents should go to %docs * Furthermore, the docs are about 40 M in size. Removing the .tex files reduces the size to around 25 M. These files are good candidates to go to a ast-doc package. If you don't want to make a separate doc package, the library documentation should be in -devel subpackage. When I have more time, I will see if the Makefile can be patched to remove the unresolved symbol 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 698067] Review Request: hiredis - A C client library for redis
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=698067 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|volke...@gmx.at 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 697836] Review Request: mmseq - Haplotype and isoform specific expression estimation for RNA-seq
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697836 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|volke...@gmx.at 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 701426] Review Request: python-taboot - Client utility for scripted multi-system administration over Func
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701426 --- Comment #10 from Tim Bielawa tbiel...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 21:49:51 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-taboot Short Description: Client utility for scripted multi-system administration over Func Owners: tbielawa Branches: f14 f15 el5 el6 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 702892] Review Request: python-modjkapi - API for modjk 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=702892 --- Comment #5 from Tim Bielawa tbiel...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 21:51:38 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-modjkapi Short Description: API for modjk management Owners: tbielawa Branches: f14 f15 el5 el6 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 701426] Review Request: python-taboot - Client utility for scripted multi-system administration over Func
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701426 Tim Bielawa tbiel...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702892] Review Request: python-modjkapi - API for modjk 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=702892 Tim Bielawa tbiel...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703178] Review Request: rubygem-declarative_authorization - The declarative_authorization plug in provides readable auth rules for Rails.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703178
--- Comment #3 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2011-05-11 22:53:19 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
+ cd /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/declarative_authorization-0.5.2
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.K4xWdp: line 29: cd:
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/declarative_authorization-0.5.2: No such file or
directory
It seems to be accessing a file outside of %buildroot. I guess you need to
prepend %{buildroot} to %{geminstdir} like:
%check
cd %{buildroot}%{geminstdir}
rake test
However, even then it still fails to build on F-15:
Using Rails from RubyGems ( 2.1.0)
/usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:53:in
`gem_original_require': no such file to load -- initializer (LoadError)
Maybe the test suite cannot run with Rails 3 in standalone mode. I think
enabling test suite could be postponed until the upstream fixes 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 693317] Review Request: emacs-flim - Basic library for handling email messages for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693317 --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-05-12 00:42:34 EDT --- Sorry for the long delay, finally had a chance to look at the package. I think xemacs-w3m still requires flim-xemacs so it would be better to keep xemacs support and rename this package to emacs-common-flim and let xemacs-flim obsolete and provide flim-xemacs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701184] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RequireSSL - Force SSL in specified pages or modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701184 Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr 2011-05-12 01:06:12 EDT --- Thank you, Marcela. Requesting SCM. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RequireSSL Short Description: Force SSL in specified pages or modules Owners: eseyman Branches: f13 f14 f15 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
