[Bug 672975] Review Request: perl-Pango - Perl interface to the pango 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=672975 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-05-28 01:42:03 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Pango New Branches: el6 Owners: spot -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 187799] Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo 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=187799 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-05-28 01:41:13 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Cairo New Branches: el6 Owners: spot -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708554] New: Review Request: umph - Command line tool for parsing video links from Youtube feeds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: umph - Command line tool for parsing video links from Youtube feeds https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708554 Summary: Review Request: umph - Command line tool for parsing video links from Youtube feeds Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: nicoleau.fab...@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://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SPECS/umph.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SRPMS/umph-0.1.8-1.fc15.src.rpm Description : umph is a command line tool for parsing video links from Youtube feeds, such as playlists, favorites and uploads. The parsed video links are printed to the standard output each separated with a newline. rpmlit is silent. Package builds on koji : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3097087 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 695232] Review Request: go_filebench - A model based file system workload generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695232 Hushan Jia changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|michel+...@sylvestre.me |nob...@fedoraproject.org -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 695232] Review Request: go_filebench - A model based file system workload generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695232 Hushan Jia changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 695232] Review Request: go_filebench - A model based file system workload generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695232 Hushan Jia changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hushan@gmail.com Flag|fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(michel+fdr@sylves | |tre.me) | --- Comment #7 from Hushan Jia 2011-05-27 19:19:36 EDT --- Hi, since it has been more than 1 month no response, I reset the flags, to make the review process continue. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592733] Review Request: turpial - Is cool twitter client with many features and very light
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592733 --- Comment #16 from Dennis Gilmore 2011-05-27 17:48:03 EDT --- builds cleanly in mock, source tarball matches upstream f0c85cc0639287b66210571841920cb35dc9117bce9a3e37616f29b1f1b4768a fedora/SOURCES/turpial-1.5.0.tar.gz f0c85cc0639287b66210571841920cb35dc9117bce9a3e37616f29b1f1b4768a turpial-1.5.0.tar.gz looks good, 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 708532] Review Request: perl-Term-Animation - ASCII sprite animation 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=708532 --- Comment #1 from Luis Bazan 2011-05-27 17:38:32 EDT --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3096983 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592733] Review Request: turpial - Is cool twitter client with many features and very light
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592733 --- Comment #15 from Edwind Richzendy Contreras Soto 2011-05-27 17:37:07 EDT --- I have a new release: SRC.rpm: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial-1.5.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Spec file: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial.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 592733] Review Request: turpial - Is cool twitter client with many features and very light
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592733 Dennis Gilmore changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|den...@ausil.us --- Comment #14 from Dennis Gilmore 2011-05-27 17:30:14 EDT --- i ill review and sponsor -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708535] New: Review Request: xenserverjava - Java SDK for XenServer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xenserverjava - Java SDK for XenServer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708535 Summary: Review Request: xenserverjava - Java SDK for XenServer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: da...@gnsa.us QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://ke4qqq.fedorapeople.org/xenserverjava.spec SRPM URL: http://ke4qqq.fedorapeople.org/xenserverjava-5.6.100.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: XenServer Java SDK for utilizing the XML-RPC interface of XenServer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708532] New: Review Request: perl-Term-Animation - ASCII sprite animation framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Term-Animation - ASCII sprite animation framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708532 Summary: Review Request: perl-Term-Animation - ASCII sprite animation framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lba...@bakertillypanama.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://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/perl-Term-Animation.spec SRPM URL: http://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/perl-Term-Animation-2.6-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: This module provides a framework to produce sprite animations using ASCII art. Each ASCII 'sprite' is given one or more frames, and placed into the animation as an 'animation object'. An animation object can have a callback routine that controls the position and frame of the object. If the constructor is passed no arguments, it assumes that it is running full screen, and behaves accordingly. Alternatively, it can accept a curses window (created with the Curses newwin call) as an argument, and will draw into that window. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 697778] Review Request: rubygem-formtastic - A Rails form builder plugin with semantically rich and accessible markup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697778 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|rubygem-formtastic-1.2.3-4. |rubygem-formtastic-1.2.3-4. |fc14|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 701841] Review Request: cargo-parent - cargo parent pom
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701841 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Orion Poplawski 2011-05-27 16:26:47 EDT --- Updated summary to: Parent pom file for cargo.codehaus.org project New Package SCM Request === Package Name: cargo-parent Short Description: Parent pom file for cargo.codehaus.org project Owners: orion Branches: f15 f14 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 697778] Review Request: rubygem-formtastic - A Rails form builder plugin with semantically rich and accessible markup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697778 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:29:20 EDT --- rubygem-formtastic-1.2.3-4.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676129 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:28:58 EDT --- qconf-1.4-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676129 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|qconf-1.4-2.fc15|qconf-1.4-2.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 701183] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RateLimit - Limits runmode call rate per user
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701183 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-CGI-Application-Plugin ||-RateLimit-1.0-2.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-05-27 16:21:56 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701001] Review Request: aunit - unit test framework for ada
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701001 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:22:18 EDT --- aunit-2010-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704705] Review Request: perl-Parallel-Iterator - Simple parallel 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=704705 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Parallel-Iterator-1.00 |perl-Parallel-Iterator-1.00 |-1.fc13 |-1.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701183] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RateLimit - Limits runmode call rate per user
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701183 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CGI-Application-Plugin |perl-CGI-Application-Plugin |-RateLimit-1.0-2.fc14 |-RateLimit-1.0-2.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 704088] Review Request: gcal - GNU Gregorian calendar 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=704088 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|gcal-3.6-3.fc13 |gcal-3.6-3.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 701183] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RateLimit - Limits runmode call rate per user
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701183 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:25:55 EDT --- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RateLimit-1.0-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704088] Review Request: gcal - GNU Gregorian calendar 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=704088 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:24:16 EDT --- gcal-3.6-3.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 697778] Review Request: rubygem-formtastic - A Rails form builder plugin with semantically rich and accessible markup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697778 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|rubygem-formtastic-1.2.3-4. |rubygem-formtastic-1.2.3-4. |fc15|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 704705] Review Request: perl-Parallel-Iterator - Simple parallel 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=704705 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Parallel-Iterator-1.00 |perl-Parallel-Iterator-1.00 |-1.fc15 |-1.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704088] Review Request: gcal - GNU Gregorian calendar 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=704088 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|gcal-3.6-3.fc15 |gcal-3.6-3.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701183] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RateLimit - Limits runmode call rate per user
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701183 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:21:49 EDT --- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-RateLimit-1.0-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704705] Review Request: perl-Parallel-Iterator - Simple parallel 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=704705 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:23:46 EDT --- perl-Parallel-Iterator-1.00-1.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704705] Review Request: perl-Parallel-Iterator - Simple parallel 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=704705 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:23:58 EDT --- perl-Parallel-Iterator-1.00-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704088] Review Request: gcal - GNU Gregorian calendar 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=704088 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:21:17 EDT --- gcal-3.6-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|hiredis-0.10.0-3.fc15 |hiredis-0.10.0-3.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 697778] Review Request: rubygem-formtastic - A Rails form builder plugin with semantically rich and accessible markup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697778 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:21:03 EDT --- rubygem-formtastic-1.2.3-4.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:20:27 EDT --- hiredis-0.10.0-3.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704088] Review Request: gcal - GNU Gregorian calendar 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=704088 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||gcal-3.6-3.fc15 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704088] Review Request: gcal - GNU Gregorian calendar 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=704088 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 16:19:38 EDT --- gcal-3.6-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641093] Review Request: keybinder - A library for registering global keyboard shortcuts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641093 --- Comment #21 from Orion Poplawski 2011-05-27 15:28:03 EDT --- Looks like keybinder requires gtk 2.20. EL6 has gtk 2.18.9. We could package up version 0.0.9, but that doesn't seem like a good idea. So I'm dropping this at the moment. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 700814] Review Request: din - A musical instrument using multiple Bezier curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=700814 --- Comment #5 from Adam Huffman 2011-05-27 15:20:40 EDT --- Another new upstream release: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/din/din.spec http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/din/din-1.6.1-1.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 708475] New: Review Request: pysdm - Python based Storage Device Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pysdm - Python based Storage Device Manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708475 Summary: Review Request: pysdm - Python based Storage Device Manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: hobbes1...@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://hobbes.dvrdns.org/packages/pysdm.spec SRPM URL: http://hobbes.dvrdns.org/packages/pysdm-0.4.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: PySDM is a Storage Device Manager that allows full customization of hard disk mountpoints without manually access to fstab. It also allows the creation of udev rules for dynamic configuration of storage devices This is on the package maintainers wishlist. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708473] New: Review Request: mingw32-cxxtest - cxxtest for mingw32
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mingw32-cxxtest - cxxtest for mingw32 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708473 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-cxxtest - cxxtest for mingw32 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: asto...@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://astokes.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-cxxtest.spec SRPM URL: http://astokes.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-cxxtest-3.10.1-4.fc15.src.rpm Description: Provided under mingw32 compilation : CxxTest is a JUnit/CppUnit/xUnit-like framework for C++. Its advantages over existing alternatives are that it: - doesn't require RTTI - doesn't require member template functions - doesn't require exception handling - doesn't require any external libraries (including memory management, file/console I/O, graphics libraries) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641093] Review Request: keybinder - A library for registering global keyboard shortcuts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641093 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@scrye.com, ||or...@cora.nwra.com --- Comment #20 from Orion Poplawski 2011-05-27 12:57:31 EDT --- We need this in EL6 for xfce4-volumed. Who is on board to be a maintainer there? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 541154] Review Request: xfce4-volumed - Daemon to add additional functionality to the volume keys of the keyboard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=541154 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||or...@cora.nwra.com Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Orion Poplawski 2011-05-27 12:53:03 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: xfce4-volumed New Branches: el6 Owners: cwickert 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 705361] Review Request: perl-Proc-SyncExec - Spawn processes but report exec() errors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705361 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-05-27 12:34:22 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701376] Review Request: ghc-citeproc-hs - Haskell library for the Citation Style Language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701376 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-05-27 12:34:05 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707885] Review Request: rubygem-bson - Ruby implementation of BSON
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707885 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-05-27 12:34:38 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 705585] Review Request: fflas-ffpack - Finite field linear algebra subroutines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705585 --- Comment #6 from Jerry James 2011-05-27 12:15:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Well, because both are independent projects, they should be two separate > packages, isn't it? They should, yes. Let's continue on that path. > How about trying to build the new givaro, then fflas-ffpack and then the new > linbox locally, and if it works as expected, add this package separately? I have done that. I've got a working linbox on my machine, with the fflas-ffpack from comment 4, and an updated givaro. > Maybe building fflas-ffpack without linbox support would work, then build > linbox against fflas-ffpack and then add linbox support (if there is any). > Right now, linbox is only needed in an utils header file with ifdef's around, > so I don't see a problem, when no linbox is around. > > Where do you think is BR: linbox needed? I only see a R on linbox... I agree it's an R. What I meant is that if linbox BRs fflas-ffpack-devel, and fflas-ffpack-devel Rs linbox-devel, then koji will have to install both fflas-ffpack-devel and the previous version of linbox-devel in order to build a new linbox. Because of the ifdefs you noted, I don't think fflas-ffpack-devel should *Require* linbox-devel, anyway. In fact, the Requires will have to go the other way; linbox-devel must R fflas-ffpack-devel. Are you okay with the plan I gave for adding a %check section? It can't be there on the initial import, but once givaro and linbox are updated, I can go back and update fflas-ffpack to add the %check section. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 700199] Review Request: tomcat - Apache Servlet/JSP Engine, RI for Servlet 3.0/JSP 2.2 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=700199
--- Comment #31 from Ole 2011-05-27 11:37:07 EDT ---
Might want to replace "tomcat" with %{name} in the add user and group block:
# add the tomcat user and group
%{_sbindir}/groupadd -g %{tcuid} -r tomcat 2>/dev/null || :
%{_sbindir}/useradd -c "Apache Tomcat" -u %{tcuid} -g tomcat \
-s /bin/nologin -r -d %{homedir} tomcat 2>/dev/null || :
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=190362 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||unifdef-1.171-10.el6 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=190362 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2011-05-27 11:12:44 EDT --- unifdef-1.171-10.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708402] New: Review Request: tophat - A spliced read mapper for RNA-Seq
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: tophat - A spliced read mapper for RNA-Seq https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708402 Summary: Review Request: tophat - A spliced read mapper for RNA-Seq Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bl...@verdurin.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/tophat/tophat.spec SRPM URL: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/tophat/tophat-1.2.0-2.fc16.src.rpm Description: TopHat is a fast splice junction mapper for RNA-Seq reads. It aligns RNA-Seq reads to mammalian-sized genomes using the ultra high-throughput short read aligner Bowtie, and then analyzes the mapping results to identify splice junctions between exons. TopHat is a collaborative effort between the University of Maryland Center for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology and the University of California, Berkeley Departments of Mathematics and Molecular and Cell Biology. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 706832] Review Request: hibernate-commons-annotations - Hibernate Annotations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=706832 --- Comment #6 from Marek Goldmann 2011-05-27 10:28:19 EDT --- Hi Jaromír, Thanks for the explanation. I've sent a mail to hibernate-commons-annotations maintainer - waiting for response. --Marek -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 --- Comment #8 from Adam Huffman 2011-05-27 10:24:12 EDT --- The wrong version was uploaded - I've fixed that now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #7 from Adam Huffman 2011-05-27 10:13:59 EDT --- New version at: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/mmseq/mmseq.spec http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/mmseq/mmseq-0.9.10b-3.fc16.src.rpm I patched the Makefile as you suggested but without the zlib-devel BR builds in Mock failed. I will be building for EPEL and samtools will be there soon (I maintain the EPEL branches). The upstream author explained that 0.9.10b is a post-release update, which according to the guidelines at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines#NonNumericRelease is acceptable as is. I've removed VERSION. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708371] Review Request: perl-RPM-VersionCompare - Compare RPM version strings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708371
Marcela Mašláňová changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová 2011-05-27 10:07:26
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=3096046
- 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
resolvedeps-f16 perl-RPM-VersionCompare-0.1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm
Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok.
Looks good, 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 708371] Review Request: perl-RPM-VersionCompare - Compare RPM version strings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708371 Marcela Mašláňová 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 706832] Review Request: hibernate-commons-annotations - Hibernate Annotations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=706832 Jaromír Cápík changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jca...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Jaromír Cápík 2011-05-27 09:42:43 EDT --- Hi Marek. The problem is, that the mentioned link always points to the latest LGPL version (what could be at the moment understood as LGPLv3+ or not). Unfortunately the LGPLv3 doesn't seem to specify an exact statement and that's why it would be better to have a full license text included in the package to avoid confusions. Please, ask the upstream to include the license file in the source package. The following text is taken directly from the Licensing Guidelines: In cases where the licensing is unclear, it may be necessary to contact the copyright holders to confirm the licensing of code or content. In those situations, it is _always_ preferred to ask upstream to resolve the licensing confusion by documenting the licensing and releasing an updated tarball. However, this is not always possible to achieve. In such cases, it is acceptable to receive confirmation of licensing via email. A copy of the email, containing full headers, must be included as a source file (marked as %doc) in the package. This file is considered part of the license text. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708371] New: Review Request: perl-RPM-VersionCompare - Compare RPM version strings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-RPM-VersionCompare - Compare RPM version strings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708371 Summary: Review Request: perl-RPM-VersionCompare - Compare RPM version strings Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ppi...@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://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-RPM-VersionCompare/perl-RPM-VersionCompare.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-RPM-VersionCompare/perl-RPM-VersionCompare-0.1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: This module provides functions to compare RPM version strings. No function is exported by default. If possible, calls are passed to native librpm library. Otherwise Python extension provided with RPM sources is re- -implemented. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707613] Review Request: dcm4che-test - Test images for dcm4che2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707613 Ankur Sinha changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |dcm4che2-test - Test images |dcm4che-test - Test images |for dcm4che2|for dcm4che2 --- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha 2011-05-27 09:10:52 EDT --- Hi Mario! With some help from the fedora-java folks, I managed to correct the package. Please find the latest at: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/dcm4che-test/dcm4che-test.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/dcm4che-test/dcm4che-test-2.6-1.fc15.src.rpm Even dcm4che accepts it as a dep etc., which gives me confidence that the packaging is ok :) Thanks, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 706832] Review Request: hibernate-commons-annotations - Hibernate Annotations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=706832 --- Comment #4 from Marek Goldmann 2011-05-27 08:51:40 EDT --- Hi Jaromír, Readme included with the package contains following sentence: "This software and its documentation are distributed under the terms of the FSF Lesser Gnu Public License (see lgpl.txt)." Though, there is no lgpl.txt file included, but POM file includes this: GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.txt Is this sufficient? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 706832] Review Request: hibernate-commons-annotations - Hibernate Annotations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=706832
Jaromír Cápík changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Jaromír Cápík 2011-05-27 08:09:24 EDT
---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint hibernate-commons-annotations-3.2.0-2.fc14.noarch.rpm
hibernate-commons-annotations.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
http://www.hibernate.org/ HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
hibernate-commons-annotations.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/maven/fragments/hibernate-commons-annotations
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint hibernate-commons-annotations-javadoc-3.2.0-2.fc14.noarch.rpm
hibernate-commons-annotations-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US)
Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Javanese
hibernate-commons-annotations-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
http://www.hibernate.org/ HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint hibernate-commons-annotations-3.2.0-2.fc14.src.rpm
hibernate-commons-annotations.src: W: invalid-url URL:
http://www.hibernate.org/ HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
hibernate-commons-annotations.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
hibernate-commons-annotations-3.2.0.Final.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
NOTE: URL is accessible.
[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].
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: LGPLv2+
The license statement contained in the source file headers matches neither the
LGPLv2+ nor the LGPLv2 statement exactly. The license version is missing at all
and the plus sign usually indicates a presence of the "or any later version"
clause in the statement. At the moment I'm waiting for the fedora-legal answer
confirming, if the license can be considered a LGPLv2 compatible.
Recommendation : Contact upstream in order to clarify that.
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] 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.
MD5SUM this package : 0fa90b40e49f372216fd63d1e60b (size 34028 bytes)
MD5SUM upstream package : not relevant -> svn export
NOTE: directory diff was empty -> sources match
[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.
[-] 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
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom
file (use "JPP." and "JPP-" correctly)
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_
[Bug 657405] Review Request: lbzip2 - fast, multi-threaded bzip2 utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=657405 --- Comment #11 from Laszlo Ersek 2011-05-27 08:07:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > However, such fixes are always backported to / instantiated for all RHEL > versions: I don't know what just happened to the previous comment, the bug I meant was bug 627882. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 657405] Review Request: lbzip2 - fast, multi-threaded bzip2 utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=657405 Laszlo Ersek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||drjo...@redhat.com --- Comment #10 from Laszlo Ersek 2011-05-27 08:04:30 EDT --- New branch request for lbzip2: (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure#other) Package Change Request == Package Name: lbzip2 New Branches: el4 el5 el6 Owners: lzap *** Justification: seems like we'd like to use lbzip2 for virt perf testing, and it's more straightforward to install EPEL-x packages for RHEL-x than to fish them out of Fedora. *** Changes likely needed: the current spec file specifies BuildRequires: bzip2-devel >= 1.0.6, dash, sharutils Requires: bzip2-libs >= 1.0.6 The bzip2-devel, bzip2-libs versions require 1.0.6+ only due to a secvuln fixed in upstream 1.0.6: "Version 1.0.6 removes a potential security vulnerability, CVE-2010-0405, so all users are recommended to upgrade immediately." (http://bzip.org/) However, such fixes are always backported to / instantiated for all RHEL versions: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2010-0405 RHEL-4 ships bzip2-*-1.0.2, RHEL-5 ships bzip2-*-1.0.3, RHEL-6 ships something more recent than that. There's no earlier EPEL than EPEL-4. Therefore I suggest removing the bzip2 dependency version numbers from the spec file, on *all* three EPEL branches. lbzip2 only needs API compatibility, which is ensured by any 1.0.x. *** Why I didn't add myself to the Owners field even now: Because I want to keep my upstream work on lbzip2 strictly isolated from my work paid-for by Red Hat. Lukas, I'll buy you a beer of your preference after working hours :) 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 700962] Review Request: pydf - Fully colorized df clone written in 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=700962 Adam Huffman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Adam Huffman 2011-05-27 06:39:31 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 597307] Review Request: fastx_toolkit - Tools to process short-reads FASTA/FASTQ files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597307 --- Comment #20 from Adam Huffman 2011-05-27 06:35:38 EDT --- Oops - I forgot to import the package... Many thanks for spotting that. Have just done so and submitted updates for all four branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 690728] Review Request: Nitrate - A test case management system written in Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690728 --- Comment #30 from Yuguang Wang 2011-05-27 05:44:05 EDT --- Hey Jens, Thanks for your help :) I've updated the spec files, added LICENSE files according to your suggestion. Now after I run rpmlint, I get: nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/element.py 0644 /usr/bin/python nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/elementtypes.py 0644 /usr/bin/python nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/load.py 0644 /usr/bin/python nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/odfmanifest.py 0644 /usr/bin/python nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/djangotinymce/setup.py 0644 /usr/bin/env nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/userfield.py 0644 /usr/bin/python nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/manifest.py 0644 /usr/bin/python nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/setup.py 0644 /usr/bin/env nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/thumbnail.py 0644 /usr/bin/python nitrate.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/tcms/core/lib/odfpy/odf/odf2xhtml.py 0644 /usr/bin/python Found another bug related to this issue: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529250 Should it be an rpmlint bug? Regarding to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Packaging_Tricks#Remove_shebang_from_Python_libraries, I manually deleted the #!/usr/bin/python shebang from the odfpy libraries etc, and the rpmlint is clean now: #rpmlint nitrate-3.3.4-1.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. #rpmlint nitrate.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. I placed the spec file and srpm in fedorapepole: http://yuwang.fedorapeople.org/nitrate.spec http://yuwang.fedorapeople.org/nitrate-3.3.4-1.src.rpm btw, the README is located in /doc/README in project dir. 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 701376] Review Request: ghc-citeproc-hs - Haskell library for the Citation Style Language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701376 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen 2011-05-27 05:41:31 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-citeproc-hs Short Description: Haskell library for the Citation Style Language Owners: petersen Branches: f14 f15 el6 InitialCC: haskell-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 707613] Review Request: dcm4che2-test - Test images for dcm4che2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707613 --- Comment #5 from Mario Ceresa 2011-05-27 05:22:00 EDT --- Sure Ankur! I'll stay tuned then... Best, Mario -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707885] Review Request: rubygem-bson - Ruby implementation of BSON
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707885
Vít Ondruch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Vít Ondruch 2011-05-27 05:01:06 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > My fist rubygem review, so be patient.
> > >
> > > I suppose it's okay to define also other paths in 'gem install' than those
> > > stated in guidelines. -> --bindir .%{_bindir}
> >
> > This avoids struggle with moving binaries and setting execution bits etc,
> > so it
> > is the recommended approach.
> >
> > >
> > > You don't own: %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ ,which you should own
> > > according guidelines.
> >
> > I own %{geminstdir} which is the same I hope
> >
> Should be fixed in packaging guidelines.
Agree :)
> >
> > >
> > > Rpmlint is complaining.
> > > rpmlint rubygem-bson-1.3.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
> > > rubygem-bson.src: W: invalid-url Source1: bson-tests.tgz
> >
> > This is custom archive with files necessary to execute the test suite.
> >
> Ok, but it's ugly.
Agree. If you know some better way ...
>
> > > rubygem-bson.noarch: W: no-documentation
> >
> > Documentation is in subpackage.
> >
> > > rubygem-bson.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary b2json
> > > rubygem-bson.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary j2bson
> >
> > No manual pages. It is not common for rubygems to contains manual pages :/
>
> resolvedeps-f16 ~/Downloads/rubygem-bson-1.3.1-1.fc16.noarch.rpm
> Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok.
>
> APPROVED
Thank you for your review.
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: rubygem-bson
Short Description: Ruby implementation of BSON
Owners: vondruch
Branches:
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 707613] Review Request: dcm4che2-test - Test images for dcm4che2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707613 --- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha 2011-05-27 03:33:28 EDT --- Hi Mario, Could you please wait a day or two before the review. Even though the package builds properly, I think there's something wrong with the placement of the pom files etc., which is essential to be able to build packages that depend on this one (such as dcm4che). I've mailed upstream requesting them to detail out the build method for the test-images. I expect a reply soon, and will try to replicate their method in the spec. Thanks, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
