[Bug 529441] Review Request: pdfbox - Java PDF 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=529441 --- Comment #14 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 02:16:50 EDT --- Orion, would you please move the build to maven 3 (aka mvn-rpmbuild ) and I'll 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 480607] Review Request: bluecove - Implementation of JSR-82 Java Bluetooth 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=480607 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #21 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 02:20:59 EDT --- I would say just import and build. You can always update to newer release after that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707002] Review Request: FreeMedForms - An open Electronic Medical Record Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707002 Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lakshminaras2...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lakshminaras2...@gmail.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 707002] Review Request: FreeMedForms - An open Electronic Medical Record Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707002 --- Comment #1 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 02:51:20 EDT --- Hey Lakshmi, If you're going to review this, can you please set the review flag to ?. 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 676879] Review Request: mpiexec - MPI job launcher that uses the PBS task interface directly
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676879 --- Comment #13 from Christos Triantafyllidis christos.triantafylli...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 03:04:16 EDT --- Hi, it's long since the last reply on this bug. I understand that there is no interest/need for this package from the Fedora/EPEL community. Should I close this bug as won't fix or leave it open till someone may start to like it? Christos -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710115] Review Request: jlatexmath - Implementation of LaTeX math mode wrote in Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710115
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-06-03
03:12:38 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
jlatexmath.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.9.6 ['0.9.6-1.fc15',
'0.9.6-1']
Please fix.
jlatexmath-fop.noarch: W: no-documentation
Not a problem.
jlatexmath-fop.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest
/usr/share/java/jlatexmath-fop.jar
Please fix.
[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+
[!] 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.
Please install the LICENSE and COPYING files.
[-] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-] 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.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[-] 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, ...)
[x] 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. Rpmlint issues.
2. Not installed License/copying files
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529441] Review Request: pdfbox - Java PDF 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=529441 --- Comment #15 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 03:30:09 EDT --- Also a single javadoc subpackage using javadoc:aggregate might be better. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 705760] Review request: retrace-server - Application for remote coredump analysis
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705760 --- Comment #6 from Michal Toman mto...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 04:09:24 EDT --- Upstream updated to 1.1 Spec URL: http://mtoman.fedorapeople.org/retrace-server.spec SRPM URL: http://mtoman.fedorapeople.org/retrace-server-1.1-2.fc15.src.rpm $ rpmlint retrace-server.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint retrace-server-1.1-2.fc15.src.rpm retrace-server.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coredump - core dump, core-dump, cored ump retrace-server.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coredump - core dump, core-dump, cored ump retrace-server.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backtrace - backtrack, back trace, back-trace 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint retrace-server-1.1-2.fc15.x86_64.rpm retrace-server.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coredump - core dump, core-dump, cored ump retrace-server.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coredump - core dump, core-dump, cored ump retrace-server.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backtrace - backtrack, back trace, back-trace retrace-server.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/spool/retrace-server retrace retrace-server.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/retrace-server 0775L retrace-server.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/retrace-server retrace retrace-server.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/retrace-server retrace retrace-server.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/cache/retrace-server retrace retrace-server.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/cache/retrace-server retrace retrace-server.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coredump2packages 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 9 warnings. retrace uid/gid reserved in 706012 /var/spool/retrace-server needs to be rwx for both apache and retrace $ rpmlint retrace-server-debuginfo-1.1-2.fc15.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710115] Review Request: jlatexmath - Implementation of LaTeX math mode wrote in Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710115
--- Comment #4 from Clément DAVID c.davi...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 04:13:43 EDT
---
Spec URL: http://davidclement8298.perso.neuf.fr/jlatexmath.spec
SRPM URL: http://davidclement8298.perso.neuf.fr/jlatexmath-0.9.6-2.fc14.src.rpm
Patch0 URL:
http://davidclement8298.perso.neuf.fr/0001-incorrect-fsf-address.patch
Thanks for the review, updated :
- Use sed on the spec file to fix class-path-in-manifest
- Fixed incoherent-version-in-changelog
- Add patch to fix fsf address
It pass rpmlint with 3 warnings fixed by comments :
jlatexmath.src:11: W: macro-in-comment %{name}
jlatexmath.src:11: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
jlatexmath.src: W: invalid-url Source0: jlatexmath-src-all-0.9.6.zip
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 706934] Review Request: rubygem-rspec-rails - RSpec-2 for Rails-3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=706934 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 457709] Review Request: hiran-perizia-fonts - English asymmetric font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457709 --- Comment #27 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 04:46:02 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 710031] Review Request: ghc-Agda - Dependently typed functional programming 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=710031 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||710383 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710383] Review Request: Agda - Commandline for dependently typed functional 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=710383 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-haskell-list@redhat. ||com Depends on||710031 Blocks||634048(Haskell-pkg-reviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710031] Review Request: ghc-Agda - Dependently typed functional programming 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=710031 --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 05:28:43 EDT --- Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/ghc-Agda/ghc-Agda.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/ghc-Agda/ghc-Agda-2.2.10-2.fc15.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3107707 Fixed the last missing BRs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710031] Review Request: ghc-Agda - Dependently typed functional programming 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=710031 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|634048(Haskell-pkg-reviews) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710383] New: Review Request: Agda - Commandline for dependently typed functional language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: Agda - Commandline for dependently typed functional language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710383 Summary: Review Request: Agda - Commandline for dependently typed functional language Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: peter...@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://petersen.fedorapeople.org/Agda/Agda.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/Agda/Agda-2.2.10-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Commandline wrapper for the Agda dependently typed functional programming language. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664140] Review Request: leksah-server - Package that provides the interface to GHC-API for leksah
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664140 --- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 05:33:47 EDT --- Sorry I got to replace ghc-prof by ghc-Cabal-devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 675009] Review Request: c3p0 - JDBC DataSources/Resource Pools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675009 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #8 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 05:35:56 EDT --- Mat, Could we get this package finished? It is blocking other work. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710386] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor - A Gnome shell system monitor extension https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor - A Gnome shell system monitor extension Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor-0.9-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: https://github.com/paradoxxxzero/gnome-shell-system-monitor-applet Description: Display system informations in gnome shell status bar, such as memory usage, cpu usage, and network rate. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3107807 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor*1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710387] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode - A gnome-shell extensions to control the screensaver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode - A gnome-shell extensions to control the screensaver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710387 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode - A gnome-shell extensions to control the screensaver Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode-0-0.1.git89577dc.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: https://github.com/RaphaelKimmig/Gnome-Presentation-Mode Description: Gnome-Presentation-Mode is a tiny gnome-shell extension that adds a new entry to the power indicator (the menu that opens when you click the battery icon). While presentation mode is on the screensaver and the automatic suspend will not kick in, allowing you to sit back and enjoy whatever you are doing without having to wiggle the mouse every few minutes. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3107795 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710387] Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode - A gnome-shell extensions to control the screensaver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710387 --- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 05:50:06 EDT --- At the moment there is no license information available from upstream. https://github.com/RaphaelKimmig/Gnome-Presentation-Mode/issues/5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710391] Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro - A gnome-shell extensions for the pomodoro technique
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710391 --- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 06:06:04 EDT --- At the moment there is no license information available from upstream. https://github.com/codito/gnome-shell-pomodoro/issues/6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710391] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro - A gnome-shell extensions for the pomodoro technique
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro - A gnome-shell extensions for the pomodoro technique https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710391 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro - A gnome-shell extensions for the pomodoro technique Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-presentation-mode-0-0.1.git89577dc.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: https://github.com/codito/gnome-shell-pomodoro Description: This extension helps you to work with the pomodoro technique here. It provides a countdown timer in the gnome-shell and keeps track of completed 25 minute cycles. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3107834 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro* gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro.src: W: invalid-license GPL 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro* gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 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 702209] Review Request: apache-commons-vfs - Provides a single API for accessing various different file systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702209 Spike spikefed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702209] Review Request: apache-commons-vfs - Provides a single API for accessing various different file systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702209 Spike spikefed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||spikefed...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|spikefed...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Spike spikefed...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 06:10:23 EDT --- I'll take this 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 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pikachu.2...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 06:10:17 EDT --- This extension is the second one submitted here and independant from the GNOME Shell Extensions pack (http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Extensions). The first one was the fedora-logo extension: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=696357 To keep a certain consistency with this extension, may it be possible to rename your package to gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor (no s to extension) ? By the way, the GNOME Shell extensions already provide a similar extension, named systemMonitor : http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell-extensions/tree/extensions/systemMonitor This extension will be enabled in the Fedora package gnome-shell-extensions very soon. To avoid confusions, shouldn't your package named gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet, as for the project name? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702209] Review Request: apache-commons-vfs - Provides a single API for accessing various different file systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702209
--- Comment #3 from Spike spikefed...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 06:40:52 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
apache-commons-vfs.src:90: W: macro-in-comment %check
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Not nice, but not a problem.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 2.0
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[!] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: f0b83b33ed4dd891231a47d474caa6e1
MD5SUM upstream package: f0b83b33ed4dd891231a47d474caa6e1
[!] 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.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom
file (use JPP. and JPP- correctly)
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven2.jpp.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package uses %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-utils (for
%update_maven_depmap macro)
=== Other suggestions ===
[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.
Tested on: fedora-rawhide-i386
=== Issues ===
1. Javadoc subpackage is missing the license file
2. BuildRequires: The BRs seem rather random to me. For example,
http://commons.apache.org/vfs/download.html doesn't list commons-compress while
it does list a few other that you missed.
=== Final Notes ===
1. Usually, apache-commons-* provide a symlink to commons-* for the jar file
and the javadoc dir. Have a look at the other apache-commons spec files for
examples.
2. Please inform upstream about their failing test (as they seem to fail with
vanilla ant and maven, too)
3. Please drop the apache-commons-parent require. It's only meant to be used as
BR (since it pulls a lot of maven stuff which obviously a no-go for non-build
environments)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 691635] Review Request: prepaid-manager-applet - An applet for the GNOME Desktop for GSM mobile prepaid SIM cards
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691635 --- Comment #13 from Felix Möller fe...@derklecks.de 2011-06-03 07:01:43 EDT --- upstream 0.0.1.2 fixes my issues mentioned in the last comment. For the package to be realy useful we need bug #710411. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708664] Review Request: jp2a - an utility for converting JPEG images to ASCII
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708664 --- Comment #2 from Andres morphe...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 07:10:28 EDT --- thanks for making observations, You can find the new spec at http://morpheusv.fedorapeople.org/jp2a/1.0.6-2/jp2a.spec http://morpheusv.fedorapeople.org/jp2a/1.0.6-2/jp2a-1.0.6-2.fc15.src.rpm this is a result the rpmlint SPECS/jp2a.spec: 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 07:17:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) To keep a certain consistency with this extension, may it be possible to rename your package to gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor (no s to extension) ? Well, I don't care how those packages are called (with or without 's'). The gnome-shell-extensions packages started to name packages like 'gnome-shell-extensions-XXX'. I thinks that we should go on with this naming schema otherwise we will confuse the users. But this is not my call. By the way, the GNOME Shell extensions already provide a similar extension, named systemMonitor : http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell-extensions/tree/extensions/systemMonitor This extension will be enabled in the Fedora package gnome-shell-extensions very soon. To avoid confusions, shouldn't your package named gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet, as for the project name? The other extension will be named gnome-shell-extensions-systemMonitor, this one here gnome-shell-extension(s)-system-monitor. I think to use 'applet' is a bad idea because this terminology belongs to Gnome 2.x. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 --- Comment #3 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 07:43:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Well, I don't care how those packages are called (with or without 's'). The gnome-shell-extensions packages started to name packages like 'gnome-shell-extensions-XXX'. I thinks that we should go on with this naming Well, I know, I'm one of the maintainers of gnome-shell-extensions ^^. These extensions were built as subpackages of the main package gnome-shell-extensions, and so named gnome-shell-extensions-foo, as defined in the guidelines. It seemed logical to me to refer to third-party extensions under the name gnome-shell-extension-bar, since the package would provide only one extension a priori. Maybe we'll need to specify guidelines for such extensions, becoming more numerous. This extension will be enabled in the Fedora package gnome-shell-extensions very soon. To avoid confusions, shouldn't your package named gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet, as for the project name? The other extension will be named gnome-shell-extensions-systemMonitor, this one here gnome-shell-extension(s)-system-monitor. I think to use 'applet' is a bad idea because this terminology belongs to Gnome 2.x. Indeed, maybe 'applet' is not appropriate here. It mayb be a case to report upstream. But it doesn't change the fact that the project name is, for the moment, system-monitor-applet. And logically, the corresponding package should reflect it in its name. Unless there are guidelines describing such a case. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707199] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 Fabian Deutsch fabian.deut...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=649495 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649495] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649495 Fabian Deutsch fabian.deut...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 --- Comment #16 from Fabian Deutsch fabian.deut...@gmx.de 2011-06-03 07:46:13 EDT --- bug #707199 also provides spec files for nova. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710439] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-noim - A gnome-shell extensions for removing the name and the IM status
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-noim - A gnome-shell extensions for removing the name and the IM status https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710439 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-noim - A gnome-shell extensions for removing the name and the IM status Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-noim.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-noim-1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.fpmurphy.com/gnome-shell-extensions/ Description: Remove name and IM status options from Gnome Shell. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108023 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-noim* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extensions-noim* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710137] Review Request: gedit-cossa - gedit plugin for GTK+ themes design
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710137 Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tbza...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 07:59:34 EDT --- Looks good, I would only change the short summary into something more obvious like gedit plugin for GTK+ themes previewing (bah, need more English lessons...). BuildRequires: autoconf, automake, libtool not needed unless you modify am files or run automake stuff within the spec file. License:GPLv2 Should be GPLv2+ (the any later version clause) rpmlint: gedit-cossa.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gedit/plugins/libcossa.a -- should be removed -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #32 from Christophe Fergeau cferg...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 07:58:45 EDT --- I'm not sure I'd have made this build system change to frogr :) There are plenty of projects building various helper libraries during the build, and then linking everything together to generate the final binary. This is the most convenient way of having separate directories when doing recursive builds with automake, which was the norm until recently. What I'd do would be to remove libflickrsoup from gitorious and to insist that for now libflickrsoup is just an internal library private to frogr, which it is. The day you decide to make libflickrsoup an actual library that you want to support, you should be able to generate a git repository with full history using git filter-branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extensions-system-monitor - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 08:01:39 EDT --- Renamed package. Updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet.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 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gnome-shell-extensions-syst |gnome-shell-extension-syste |em-monitor - A Gnome shell |m-monitor-applet - A Gnome |system monitor extension|shell system monitor ||extension -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710137] Review Request: gedit-cossa - gedit plugin for GTK+ themes design
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710137 --- Comment #3 from Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 08:11:04 EDT --- Builds fine in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108036 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710387] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-presentation-mode - A gnome-shell extensions to control the screensaver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710387 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gnome-shell-extensions-pres |gnome-shell-extension-prese |entation-mode - A |ntation-mode - A |gnome-shell extensions to |gnome-shell extensions to |control the screensaver |control the screensaver --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 08:07:26 EDT --- Renamed files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-presentation-mode.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-presentation-mode-0-0.1.git89577dc.fc15.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 710137] Review Request: gedit-cossa - gedit plugin for GTK+ themes design
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710137
--- Comment #2 from Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 08:08:41 EDT
---
# MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
done, see above
# MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK
# MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK
# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
Seems so
# MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines
OK
# MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license
OK
# MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc
OK
# MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK
# MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK
# MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK
# MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
# MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, 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.
Not needed.
# MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK, see above
# MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK
# MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
Not needed, libraries are private to an application, outside of usual search
paths and loaded in runtime.
# MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK
# MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
OK
# MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
OK
# MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)
OK
# MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
OK
# MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK
# MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK
# MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
N/A
# MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present.
OK
# MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A
# MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
See above
# MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go
in a -devel package.
N/A, unversioned .so libraries
# MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
N/A
# MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
OK
# MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in
the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not
need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your
explanation.
Not needed.
#
[Bug 710439] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-noim - A gnome-shell extension for removing the name and the IM status
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710439 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gnome-shell-extensions-noim |gnome-shell-extension-noim |- A gnome-shell extensions |- A gnome-shell extension |for removing the name and |for removing the name and |the IM status |the IM status --- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 08:17:12 EDT --- Renamed files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-noim.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-noim-1.0-1.fc15.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 710391] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-pomodoro - A gnome-shell extensions for the pomodoro technique
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710391 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gnome-shell-extensions-pomo |gnome-shell-extension-pomod |doro - A gnome-shell|oro - A gnome-shell |extensions for the pomodoro |extensions for the pomodoro |technique |technique --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 08:13:27 EDT --- Renamed files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-pomodoro.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-pomodoro-0-0.1.git286a249.fc15.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 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pikachu.2...@gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 08:20:27 EDT --- Since I started to comment on your work, I will review your package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710391] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-pomodoro - A gnome-shell extension for the pomodoro technique
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710391 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gnome-shell-extension-pomod |gnome-shell-extension-pomod |oro - A gnome-shell |oro - A gnome-shell |extensions for the pomodoro |extension for the pomodoro |technique |technique -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710387] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-presentation-mode - A gnome-shell extension to control the screensaver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710387 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gnome-shell-extension-prese |gnome-shell-extension-prese |ntation-mode - A|ntation-mode - A |gnome-shell extensions to |gnome-shell extension to |control the screensaver |control the screensaver -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710137] Review Request: gedit-cossa - gedit plugin for GTK+ themes design
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710137 --- Comment #4 from Ignacio Casal Quinteiro (nacho) i...@gnome.org 2011-06-03 08:19:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) Looks good, I would only change the short summary into something more obvious like gedit plugin for GTK+ themes previewing (bah, need more English lessons...). fixed BuildRequires: autoconf, automake, libtool not needed unless you modify am files or run automake stuff within the spec file. fixed License:GPLv2 Should be GPLv2+ (the any later version clause) fixed rpmlint: gedit-cossa.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gedit/plugins/libcossa.a -- should be removed and fixed. Thanks for the review. File in the same address. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710137] Review Request: gedit-cossa - gedit plugin for GTK+ themes design
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710137 Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 08:23:24 EDT --- OK, looks to be alright now. 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 710452] New: Review Request: unzix - A WinZix archive extractor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: unzix - A WinZix archive extractor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710452 Summary: Review Request: unzix - A WinZix archive extractor Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: m...@banu.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://mukund.org/tmp/unzix.spec SRPM URL: http://mukund.org/tmp/unzix-0.2.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Unzix is a small command-line program for extracting files from the new WinZix archive format. I am a new packager and will need a sponsor. :) Unzix is a program I have written myself (i.e., I'm the upstream). It is BSD licensed and uses zlib as a dependency. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710451] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-workspacesmenu - A gnome-shell extension for faster work spaces switching
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-workspacesmenu - A gnome-shell extension for faster work spaces switching https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710451 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-workspacesmenu - A gnome-shell extension for faster work spaces switching Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-workspacesmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-workspacesmenu-0-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.fpmurphy.com/gnome-shell-extensions/ Description: Add works paces menu to status area of Gnome Shell for fast switching. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108078 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-workspacesmenu* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-workspacesmenu* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710453] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-righthotcorner - A gnome-shell extension for an additional hot corner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-righthotcorner - A gnome-shell extension for an additional hot corner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710453 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-righthotcorner - A gnome-shell extension for an additional hot corner Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-righthotcorner.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-righthotcorner-1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.fpmurphy.com/gnome-shell-extensions/ Description: This Gnome Shell extension adds a new hot corner to upper right of monitor. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108099 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-righthotcorner* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-righthotcorner* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #33 from Mario Sanchez Prada msanc...@igalia.com 2011-06-03 08:47:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) I'm not sure I'd have made this build system change to frogr :) There are plenty of projects building various helper libraries during the build, and then linking everything together to generate the final binary. This is the most convenient way of having separate directories when doing recursive builds with automake, which was the norm until recently. Well, I'm not an expert on this matters but as frogr is a small application and not sure that this makes a big difference in terms of building it. However, if that helps Fedora packagers to be happier, then I'll be happier too, knowing that in the future the door to make flicksoup an independent library is still open. Anyway, reverting that commit is also a possibility in case we wanted to do it so. For the time being, and to avoid too much ping-pong with this, I'll leave it the way it is now: no libflicksoup.a file. What I'd do would be to remove libflickrsoup from gitorious and to insist that for now libflickrsoup is just an internal library private to frogr, which it is. The day you decide to make libflickrsoup an actual library that you want to support, you should be able to generate a git repository with full history using git filter-branch. Done, and also changed the description in live.gnome.org/Frogr not to mention it. Hope now the FPC believes me when I say flicksoup is not an independently maintained library yet :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649495] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649495 --- Comment #17 from Carl Trieloff cctriel...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 08:51:39 EDT --- Also, although AMQP in theory should be compatible I haven't had much luck with python-amqplib and qpid, but I also haven't tried in about a year. I don't believe amqp-lib is comaptibale. There is a python lib in fedora, python-qpid which is qpid and Rabbit every other AQMP broker compat. For fedora, easiest would be to swap out amqp-lib out with python-qpid Carl. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707199] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 Robert Knight kni...@princeton.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kni...@princeton.edu --- Comment #1 from Robert Knight kni...@princeton.edu 2011-06-03 08:58:43 EDT --- I get a 404 Not Found from the src.rpm URL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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: mingw-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 --- Comment #13 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl 2011-06-03 09:01:16 EDT --- The big difference between GNU libiconv and win-iconv is that GNU libiconv has implemented all the character set conversion in its own code while win-iconv uses the Win32 API to achieve the exact same goal. Win-iconv is meant to be a drop-in replacement for GNU libiconv as it has the same API interface and all it's functions should behave the same as GNU libiconv. Projects like Glib/GTK have also been using win-iconv for some time now in their Win32 releases so this gives me the confidence that it's good to replace GNU libiconv with win-iconv (as it's much smaller than GNU libiconv). I've also been testing win-iconv in the mingw-w64 testing repo (where all packages have been rebuilt) and haven't stumbled across any regressions yet. This proposed change was also announced to the fedora-mingw mailing list recently (see comment 4) and nobody objected to it, so we decided to continue with the review process. It looks like the 0.0.3 version was released less than 48 hours ago. I've updated the package to use this new version: Spec URL: http://ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw-win-iconv.spec SRPM URL: http://ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw-win-iconv-0.0.3-1.fc15.src.rpm * Fri Jun 3 2011 Erik van Pienbroek epien...@fedoraproject.org - 0.0.3-1 - Update to 0.0.3 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710457] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-noripple - A gnome-shell extension to disable hot corner ripple effects
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-noripple - A gnome-shell extension to disable hot corner ripple effects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710457 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-noripple - A gnome-shell extension to disable hot corner ripple effects Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-noripple.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-noripple-1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.fpmurphy.com/gnome-shell-extensions/ Description: This Gnome Shell extension disables Activities hot corner ripple effects. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108129 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-noripple* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-noripple* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649495] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649495 --- Comment #18 from Robert Knight kni...@princeton.edu 2011-06-03 09:06:00 EDT --- The ajaxterm should probably be part of the compute package. (Comment 14) The spec files are there, but the src.rpm URL gets a 404. (Comment 16) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707002] Review Request: FreeMedForms - An open Electronic Medical Record Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707002 Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.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 708475] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708475 --- Comment #8 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 09:08:23 EDT --- I created a patch to remove SimpleGladeApp.py from the makefile and installed the new build of pysdm and tepache and it found SimpleGladeApp.py in /usr/lib/python*/site-packages/ so other than getting tepache approved I think we're good to go. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693608] Review Request: icinga - System Monitoring Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693608 Michael Friedrich michael.friedr...@univie.ac.at changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michael.friedr...@univie.ac ||.at --- Comment #7 from Michael Friedrich michael.friedr...@univie.ac.at 2011-06-03 09:07:43 EDT --- Idoutils are provided for mysql, postgresql and oracle. If it is build with --enable-idoutils like in the spec it is build for use with mysql. If --with-pgsql is also added it is build for postgresql. --with-oracle would build for oracle but needs ocilib or oracle instant client, both not use able for build because of licensing. See: http://docs.icinga.org/1.3.0/en/quickstart-idoutils.html allow me to correct that as I am the developer who added the --enable-pgsql flag in order to use libpq instead of libdbi's abstraction layer for postgresql. current implementation of idoutils focuses on 2 dependencies, which are used productively and are fully implemented: * --enable-idoutils needs libdbi, whereas you can load either libdbd-mysql or libdbd-pgsql as a rdbms driver being detected as approriate. so this flag as is will provide *either* mysql *or* pgsql - no further configure option needed during build * --enable-idoutils --enable-oracle requires ocilib as oracle rdbms abstraction layer. as there are no builds available, i have created a spec file myself in order to ship that in our environment. https://wiki.icinga.org/display/Dev/ocilib but due to the dependency on commercial, not fully licensed rpms (oracle instantclient) this can't be built into by default. so this was made an exclusive configure option for those demanding a seperated build (gcc will create another binary, ido2db.cfg will need an adapted config whilst depending on tnsnames.ora and such. I can see the difficulties in building both mysql and postgresql support, but I think it would be good to do so and split idoutils in three packages: - idoutils providing the common files - idoutils-mysql providing the files for mysql - idoutils-postgresql providing the files for postgresql and delete the oracle specific files. that sounds good to me, but keep in mind that rpmforge spec file (which is the default we provide within the official Icinga tar.gz) already built - icinga-idoutils (for libdbi usage with mysql and pgsql) - icinga-idoutils-oracle is never found anywhere, but can be contributed somewhere for those needing it (e.g. Icinga Wiki) Even though, to conclude with the original discussion - my packaging skills are work-in-progress, especially on rpmlint/selinux. So if you have any suggestions especially for RHEL/Fedora on the spec file which could fit to upstream (side-by-side for SuSE), then feel free to get in touch. Either open a new issue on the dev tracker, get aboard the mailinglists or join the IRC community - https://dev.icinga.org https://www.icinga.org/support Kind regards, Michael -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592628] Review Request: key-mon - Utility to show live keyboard and mouse status
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592628 Marc-Andre Lureau marcandre.lur...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #427695|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #8 from Marc-Andre Lureau marcandre.lur...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 09:30:58 EDT --- Created attachment 502810 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=502810 updated spec $ rpmlint key-mon key-mon.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary key-mon 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint key-mon.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710475] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-iconplacesbookmarks - A gnome-shell extension to add a Places and Bookmarks menu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-iconplacesbookmarks - A gnome-shell extension to add a Places and Bookmarks menu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710475 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-iconplacesbookmarks - A gnome-shell extension to add a Places and Bookmarks menu Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-iconplacesbookmarks.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-iconplacesbookmarks-1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.fpmurphy.com/gnome-shell-extensions/ Description: This Gnome Shell extension adds a Places and Bookmarks menu to panel. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108210 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-iconplacesbookmarks* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-iconplacesbookmarks* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710484] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions - A gnome-shell extension to add Poweroff and Hibernate options
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions - A gnome-shell extension to add Poweroff and Hibernate options https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710484 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions - A gnome-shell extension to add Poweroff and Hibernate options Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions-2.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.fpmurphy.com/gnome-shell-extensions/ Description: This Gnome Shell extension adds Poweroff and Hibernate options to user menu. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108232 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #34 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-06-03 10:22:36 EDT --- I agree with Christophe that it shouldn't be a problem to build private static libraries and link them to the binary. As long as they are an exclusive part of the project this should be fine. In order to emphasize flicksoup is an integral part of frogr and not intended to be used in third-party projects, I suggest to unify the source headers and release everything under GPLv3. Having differently licensed files might require some explanation (and an additional COPYING file with the LGPL license text in src/flicksoup ;-)). You can change the license back to LGPLv3 -- or whatever license you prefer -- once flicksoup is ready to become a separate project. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708970] Review Request: rubygem-Platform - Hopefully robust platform sensing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708970 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-06-03 10:32:14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710452] Review Request: unzix - A WinZix archive extractor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710452 Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||nphil...@redhat.com Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nphil...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 10:29:15 EDT --- I'm taking this review. Added FE-NEEDSPONSOR to blockers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #35 from Christophe Fergeau cferg...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 10:42:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #34) In order to emphasize flicksoup is an integral part of frogr and not intended to be used in third-party projects, I suggest to unify the source headers and release everything under GPLv3. Having differently licensed files might require some explanation (and an additional COPYING file with the LGPL license text in src/flicksoup ;-)). You can change the license back to LGPLv3 -- or whatever license you prefer -- once flicksoup is ready to become a separate project. Here I disagree, LGPLv3 licensed code can be used as if it was licensed under the GPLv3, so no compatibility issues as far as I know, and if external contributions are made to this code, relicensing from GPLv3 to LGPLv3 will be annoying (ie need to contribute everyone to get their agreement). So I don't really see a compelling reason to do the relicensing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708934] Review Request: rubygem-pg - A Ruby interface to the PostgreSQL RDBMS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708934 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #11 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@fedoraproject.org 2011-06-03 10:54:16 EDT --- Ah, no. Arch-dependent .so file MUST be installed under %ruby_sitearch/ not under %geminstdir/lib. (on x86_64, this file must be under /usr/lib64/..). Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Note and check how other rubygem based packages containing .so file handles this type of files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708934] Review Request: rubygem-pg - A Ruby interface to the PostgreSQL RDBMS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708934 --- Comment #12 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 10:58:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) Ah, no. Arch-dependent .so file MUST be installed under %ruby_sitearch/ not under %geminstdir/lib. (on x86_64, this file must be under /usr/lib64/..). Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Note and check how other rubygem based packages containing .so file handles this type of files. Thank you for your hint, I will fix the package accordingly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708664] Review Request: jp2a - an utility for converting JPEG images to ASCII
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708664 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #3 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2011-06-03 10:58:07 EDT --- you're already sponsored by toshio at fudcon-panama , removing 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 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #36 from Mario Sanchez Prada msanc...@igalia.com 2011-06-03 11:07:21 EDT --- (In reply to comment #34) I agree with Christophe that it shouldn't be a problem to build private static libraries and link them to the binary. As long as they are an exclusive part of the project this should be fine. Ok, it's obvious then (as per your comment and Christophe's) that I misunderstood you in the first comments: I though having a .a file was actually an issue. I'll probably change it at some point back to how it was before. Now that flicksoup is no longer published independently, and that I've updated references in wording inside frogr (and in live.gnome.org) that shouldn't be an issue I guess. In order to emphasize flicksoup is an integral part of frogr and not intended to be used in third-party projects, I suggest to unify the source headers and release everything under GPLv3. Having differently licensed files might require some explanation (and an additional COPYING file with the LGPL license text in src/flicksoup ;-)). You can change the license back to LGPLv3 -- or whatever license you prefer -- once flicksoup is ready to become a separate project. If putting a COPYING file inside src/flicksoup is good enough I'd go for this approach, instead of changing the license of flicksoup files to GPLv3 now. Btw, not sure at this point whether it would be still needed that I release 0.5.1 to ease life of Fedora packagers. Perhaps it's already clear enough that flicksoup is not maintained separately :-), otherwise just ping me, give me some time (cause I did this just in spare time), and I'll try to do it asap. 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 710517] New: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon - A gnome-shell extension for removing the accessibility icon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon - A gnome-shell extension for removing the accessibility icon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710517 Summary: Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon - A gnome-shell extension for removing the accessibility icon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon-20110529-1.fc15.src.rpm Project URL: http://martin-weusten.de/projects/gnomeshell-extensions/remove-accessibility-icon/ Description: This simple extension does nothing more than to remove the accessibility icon in the top right corner of the GNOME panel. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3108677 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop021 SRPMS]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon* gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon.src: W: invalid-license GPL 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [fab@laptop021 noarch]$ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon* gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL gnome-shell-extension-remove-accessibility-icon.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Upstream was asked about the license. So far no answer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #37 from Mario Sanchez Prada msanc...@igalia.com 2011-06-03 11:32:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #36) [...] If putting a COPYING file inside src/flicksoup is good enough I'd go for this approach, instead of changing the license of flicksoup files to GPLv3 now. http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/commit/?id=56616a73f0816ca4d22cedf5225671e76e655a06 :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710194] Review Request: tepache - Code sketcher 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=710194 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 11:39:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Hmm... The only problem I see is that tepache isn't a module but a end user script. SimpleGladeApp.py is the module. Ah, good point. In that case, this package meets all of the MUST requirements, so it is approved. I encourage you to contact upstream about a license file, though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #38 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-06-03 11:38:30 EDT --- (In reply to comment #35) Here I disagree, LGPLv3 licensed code can be used as if it was licensed under the GPLv3, so no compatibility issues as far as I know, and if external contributions are made to this code, relicensing from GPLv3 to LGPLv3 will be annoying (ie need to contribute everyone to get their agreement). So I don't really see a compelling reason to do the relicensing. Of course it's possible to keep the separate license but then you have to explain why an integral part of frogr not intended to be used externally needs its own license. If everything goes into an application licensed under GPLv3, why do you need LGPLv3 code in a separate directory? This just looks like a project bundled with the tarball. But that's only my humble opinion. Let's FPC have a look at this. Mario B. would you ask for a bundled library exception? (In reply to comment #36) Ok, it's obvious then (as per your comment and Christophe's) that I misunderstood you in the first comments: I though having a .a file was actually an issue No, sorry for the confusion. Linking object files directly or putting them in a static library and link the .a file doesn't make a big difference. The question is: Do we have a library that could be used outside the project (and is promoted a s such) or is it just a module exclusively related to the main project. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708475 --- Comment #9 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 11:43:01 EDT --- Can you provide a link to the final spec file? I'd like to look through it one more time to satisfy myself that we've addressed all the issues. 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 708475] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708475 --- Comment #10 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 11:56:22 EDT --- I can, but was waiting on a final call on the tepache package name... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710194] Review Request: tepache - Code sketcher 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=710194 Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 12:04:51 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: tepache Short Description: Code sketcher for python Owners: hobbes1069 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 710194] Review Request: tepache - Code sketcher 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=710194 --- Comment #6 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 12:02:56 EDT --- Contacted upstream, we'll see if the contacts me back. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708475 --- Comment #11 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 12:11:16 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) Can you provide a link to the final spec file? I'd like to look through it one more time to satisfy myself that we've addressed all the issues. Thanks. Here's the revised sources: SPEC: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pysdm/pysdm.spec SRPM: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pysdm/pysdm-0.4.1-2.fc14.src.rpm On a side note, do you use a template for the MUST's and SHOULD's? The reason I usually only list ones I find a problem with is because it seems a lot of work to list stuff that's good/OK. Thanks, Richard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708934] Review Request: rubygem-pg - A Ruby interface to the PostgreSQL RDBMS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708934 --- Comment #13 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 12:25:18 EDT --- Couldn't be added test on *.so into rpmlint? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529441] Review Request: pdfbox - Java PDF 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=529441 --- Comment #16 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2011-06-03 12:46:52 EDT --- * Fri Jun 3 2011 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com - 1.5.0-2 - Use maven 3 - Single javadoc package http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/pdfbox.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/pdfbox-1.5.0-2.fc15.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 701347] Review Request: mingw-gtkmm30 - MinGW Windows C++ interface for the GTK+ 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=701347 --- Comment #6 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2011-06-03 13:20:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) mingw32-gtkmm30.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/mingw32-gtkmm30-3.0.1/COPYING 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings. ! the fsf address issue should be addressed. Did you or do you know whether the native package maintainer has contacted upstream? Filed a bug with the upstream bug tracker: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=651797 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #39 from Mario Sanchez Prada msanc...@igalia.com 2011-06-03 13:26:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #38) (In reply to comment #35) Here I disagree, LGPLv3 licensed code can be used as if it was licensed under the GPLv3, so no compatibility issues as far as I know, and if external contributions are made to this code, relicensing from GPLv3 to LGPLv3 will be annoying (ie need to contribute everyone to get their agreement). So I don't really see a compelling reason to do the relicensing. Of course it's possible to keep the separate license but then you have to explain why an integral part of frogr not intended to be used externally needs its own license. If everything goes into an application licensed under GPLv3, why do you need LGPLv3 code in a separate directory? This just looks like a project bundled with the tarball. But that's only my humble opinion. Let's FPC have a look at this. Mario B. would you ask for a bundled library exception? Yeah, I understand. That's why I added a Note: explanation in the README file, because the truth is that I hope at some poing to have some time to devote to make it a library (or that someone else step in and do it :-)). Thinking that way, it makes a lot of sense to me to license those files as LGPL. (In reply to comment #36) Ok, it's obvious then (as per your comment and Christophe's) that I misunderstood you in the first comments: I though having a .a file was actually an issue No, sorry for the confusion. Linking object files directly or putting them in a static library and link the .a file doesn't make a big difference. Ok, got it. I'll probably get it back to the original situation at some point then. The question is: Do we have a library that could be used outside the project (and is promoted a s such) or is it just a module exclusively related to the main project. After recent events, I'd say now the answer is simple: no, we do not have such a library that could be used outside the project yet. What I'll probably do in the future, unless someone else do it first, is to wait till frogr being stable and feature complete enough so I can forget about releasing new versions for some time, then focusing on starting my evil plan: 1. Take the flicksoup files out of frogr and release them as an independent library. 2. Try to convince people out there to package that library, so I can further safely make frogr depend on it for future releases, (at least in those distros already packaging frogr). 3. Make the next release of frogr depend on that library, removing all the files under src/flicksoup 4. Release new version frogr depending on flicksoup, finally. How does it sound? Keep in mind that my evil plan could take months to materialize, perhaps when my second child is born (late August 2011) it could be a good moment to think about it. Why? well, if you think that I started frogr right when my first son was born, you could understand it would make sense to me to do something similar with flicksoup when the second one comes to life... kind of my personal way of welcoming my sons to the world of FS, right since their most early days :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708934] Review Request: rubygem-pg - A Ruby interface to the PostgreSQL RDBMS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708934 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-06-03 13:39:05 --- Comment #14 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 13:39:05 EDT --- This is the latest version of spec file: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=rubygem-pg.git;a=blob;f=rubygem-pg.spec;h=6255fef8a931cb671d664f39e30b8991fd83fd44;hb=HEAD -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 690919] Review Request: aswvdial - Dockapp for wvdial
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690919 --- Comment #13 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-06-03 13:45:52 EDT --- Thanks again. The files have been updated: Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/aswvdial.spec SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/aswvdial-1.7-4.fc15.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 702846] Review Request: mingw32-gdb - MinGW Windows port of the GDB debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702846 --- Comment #5 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2011-06-03 13:53:48 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Thomas! (In reply to comment #3) + The package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines ! please modify it to anticipate the MinGW_future packaging guidelines (i.e. rename it to mingw-gdb) Fixed. ! while the built gdb.exe does work on native Windows, wine gdb.exe just hangs. I would expect to be able to enter help etc. Since the MinGW project goal is to minimize windows use, I think gdb.exe working with wine should be a goal if we are to include the mingw32-gdb package in fedora No idea why it hangs like that and I don't really intend to dig into wine/gdb source to figure it out. In my opinion, gdb is an invaluable debugging tool and as such, it would make sense to keep it in Fedora, even if it doesn't run entirely correctly under Wine (besides, Wine is unavailable on our secondary arches like arm and ppc). If we provide a toolchain to build packages, we should also make sure there's a way to debug them with free tools. There have been numerous people popping in to the #fedora-mingw IRC channel and asking for gdb.exe; each time we've had to send them off to a third party site. Spec URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/mingw-gdb.spec SRPM URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/mingw-gdb-7.2-2.fc15.src.rpm * Fri Jun 03 2011 Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee - 7.2-2 - Renamed the source package to mingw-gdb (#702846) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710391] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-pomodoro - A gnome-shell extension for the pomodoro technique
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710391 --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-03 14:00:11 EDT --- * Fri Jun 03 2011 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net - 0-0.2.git13030cd - License is GPLv3+ - COPYING file added Here are the updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extensions-pomodoro.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gnome-shell-extension-pomodoro-0-0.2.git13030cd.fc15.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 708664] Review Request: jp2a - an utility for converting JPEG images to ASCII
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708664 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(morpheusv@gmail.c ||om) --- Comment #4 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2011-06-03 14:07:05 EDT --- Can you post here a link to a koji scratch build ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693831] Review Request: ocaml-dpt - SAT solver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693831 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||710568 --- Comment #1 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 14:07:18 EDT --- It looks like ocamldsort is broken in Fedora 15 and Rawhide at the moment. This package should still build on Fedora 14, but will have to wait on an ocamldsort update otherwise. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 705104] Review Request: freediams - Pharmaceutical Drugs Prescriptor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705104 --- Comment #7 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-06-03 14:10:51 EDT --- Referencing your review swapping e-mail, please take a look at http://www.geofrogger.net/review/freediams-0.5.4-2.fc14.src.rpm I took an approach in removing the bundled lib. Please also notice the additional TODO items! Sadly, the whole thing doesn't work, since the final binary isn't linked to the libs. Doesn't work with your original package either. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710452] Review Request: unzix - A WinZix archive extractor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710452
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2011-06-03 14:11:02
EDT ---
Yet another wrapper around gzip..?
A few notes, I hope Nils won't mind :)
- Drop the empty directives
%pre
%post
%preun
%postun
- Drop the explicit Requires: on zlib, it is picked up automatically by RPM.
(It's also forbidden in the Fedora Packaging guidelines at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Explicit_Requires )
- In case the man page compression format changes, it's better to use
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.*
instead of
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz
Otherwise looks good 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 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #40 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-06-03 14:12:45 EDT --- (In reply to comment #39) The question is: Do we have a library that could be used outside the project (and is promoted a s such) or is it just a module exclusively related to the main project. After recent events, I'd say now the answer is simple: no, we do not have such a library that could be used outside the project yet. In any case, I would prefer a proper way for the time being. As the Gitorious repo has been crowded, it is no longer needed to ask for a bundled library exception, because there's no library anymore outside there. What does it mean for the technical side of the package? My idea is to use the recent Git commits as patches to make the debug file creation work. Then we could go ahead with Frogr itself. Once a day we have a separate library, then it is time to roll up the process again. For now, we should concentrate the effort to v0.5, even with patches, of course. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710484] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-poweroptions - A gnome-shell extension to add Poweroff and Hibernate options
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710484 Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il changed: What|Removed |Added CC||el...@doom.co.il --- Comment #1 from Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il 2011-06-03 14:19:27 EDT --- you can simply use gnome-shell-extensions-alternative-status-menu (already in fedora). -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 Christopher Aillon cail...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com --- Comment #8 from Christopher Aillon cail...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 14:21:00 EDT --- Spot, ping! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 682544] Review request: gargoyle - multi-format interactive fiction interpreter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=682544 --- Comment #7 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com 2011-06-03 14:33:31 EDT --- Slowly working my way through reviewing this. MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. This looks ok, with one exception. Please help me understand the license for theGlulxe portion ? From terps/glulxe/README: The source code in this package is copyright 1999-2010 by Andrew Plotkin. You may copy and distribute it freely, by any means and under any conditions, as long as the code and documentation is not changed. You may also incorporate this code into your own program and distribute that, or modify this code and use and distribute the modified version, as long as you retain a notice in your program or documentation which mentions my name and the URL shown above. as long as the code and documentation is not changed ? But then You may also ... modify this code ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)| --- Comment #9 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-06-03 14:38:02 EDT --- I think License: GPLv3+ is appropriate here, unless you foresee a need for Fedora to distribute the ITS definitions under different terms. Lifting FE-Legal. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 --- Comment #6 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-06-03 14:44:35 EDT --- The package works well and is OK. Just some comments: 1) You can remove the version condition on gnome-shell Requires, since the stable repos already provide GS = 3.0.1 2) About the %posttrans/%postun, you'd better rely on the guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#GSettings_Schema I suppose you were inspired by the gnome-shell-extensions. This package will have its scriptlets fixed to according to the guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701347] Review Request: mingw-gtkmm30 - MinGW Windows C++ interface for the GTK+ 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=701347 --- Comment #7 from Thomas Sailer t.sai...@alumni.ethz.ch 2011-06-03 14:58:51 EDT --- Looks good, thanks! APPROVED by sailer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 701347] Review Request: mingw-gtkmm30 - MinGW Windows C++ interface for the GTK+ 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=701347 --- Comment #8 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2011-06-03 15:06:58 EDT --- Thanks Thomas! Can you set the fedora‑review flag too please? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
