[Bug 696527] Review Request: django-kombu - Kombu transport using the Django database as a message store

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=696527

Rahul Sundaram  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #5 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-07-16 02:17:52 EDT 
---
Package Change Request
==
Package Name: django-kombu
New Branches: el6
Owners: sundaram pjp

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722198] Review Request: tnef - TNEF attachment unpacker

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722198

David Timms  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||dti...@iinet.net.au

--- Comment #1 from David Timms  2011-07-16 02:05:22 EDT 
---
Hi Andrew,

You might have missed that I already have tnef up for review at:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522920

I am still wanting to maintain this in Fedora (since my family keep sending
winmail.dat attachments). I think my version already covers some enhancements,
like nautilus/dolphin right click menus etc.

Would you be willing to perform the review for my package instead ?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722407] Review Request: python-kombu - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722407

Rahul Sundaram  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #5 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-07-15 22:30:24 EDT 
---

New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: python-kombu
Short Description: AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Owners: sundaram pjp
Branches: f15 el-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 720447] Review Request: python-unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720447

--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 22:15:58 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 722640] New: Review Request: R-qcc - SQC package for R

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: R-qcc - SQC package for R

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722640

   Summary: Review Request: R-qcc - SQC package for R
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: Unspecified
OS/Version: Unspecified
Status: NEW
  Severity: unspecified
  Priority: unspecified
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: wb8...@arrl.net
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
  Story Points: ---


Spec URL: http://jjmcd.fedorapeople.org/Download/R-qcc.spec
SRPM URL: http://jjmcd.fedorapeople.org/Download/R-qcc-2.0.1-1.fc15.src.rpm

Description:
An R package for quality control charting and statistical process control.

The qcc package for the R statistical environment provides:
- Plot Shewhart quality control charts
- Plot Cusum and EMWA charts for continuous data
- Draw operating characteristic curves
- Perform process capability analysis
- Draw Pareto charts and cause-and-effect diagrams

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720807] Review Request: askbot-plugin-authfas - Askbot plugin to facilitate FAS authentication

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720807

--- Comment #5 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-07-15 21:49:05 EDT 
---

Additional note.  Since you are the upstream,  you might want to just rename
the tarball and fix the spec file instead of using the srcname macro there

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720807] Review Request: askbot-plugin-authfas - Askbot plugin to facilitate FAS authentication

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720807

Rahul Sundaram  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+

--- Comment #4 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-07-15 21:43:35 EDT 
---

Request for EPEL 6 branch but don't build anything till we get askbot in the
repo 

===  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 720447] Review Request: python-unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720447

Rahul Sundaram  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #8 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-07-15 21:37:01 EDT 
---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: python-unidecode
Short Description: Python module for US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text.
Owners: pjp sundaram
Branches: f15 el-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 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly 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

Matthias Clasen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2011-07-15 21:37:47

--- Comment #22 from Matthias Clasen  2011-07-15 21:37:47 
EDT ---
Build is done, so closing the bug

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 675587] Review Request: pytest - Simple powerful testing with Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675587

Tim Flink  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||dmalc...@redhat.com

--- Comment #8 from Tim Flink  2011-07-15 18:41:02 EDT ---
I didn't run rpmlint on the F15 rpms when I did the initial review work but
re-ran it recently as part of the review for pycmd.

pytest shows similar python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime errors with python 3.2
(at the end of this comment). As discussed in bug 675588, this is an issue with
setuputils in python 3.2 where there are extra .pyc files (tracked by bug
722578). The actual .pyc files have the correct mtime and rpmlint is erroring
out on the extras.

These failures shouldn't affect the review - adding the information to keep
track of it

= rpmlint output =

$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-15-x86_64/result/python3-pytest-2.0.3-1.fc15.noarch.rpm 
python3-pytest.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/main.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/main.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pdb.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pdb.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/main.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/main.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/junitxml.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/junitxml.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pytester.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pytester.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/recwarn.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/recwarn.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/recwarn.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/recwarn.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pastebin.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pastebin.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pastebin.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/pastebin.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/junitxml.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/junitxml.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/helpconfig.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/helpconfig.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/core.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/core.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/core.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/core.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/resultlog.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/resultlog.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/resultlog.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/resultlog.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/assertion.pyo 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/assertion.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/helpconfig.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/helpconfig.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/capture.pyc 2011-04-17T23:15:38
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/_pytest/capture.py 2011-07-15T09:28:15
python3-pytest.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pytest.pyc 2011-04-17T23:

[Bug 720807] Review Request: askbot-plugin-authfas - Askbot plugin to facilitate FAS authentication

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720807

pjp  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #3 from pjp  2011-07-15 16:59:46 EDT ---
I've made the changes, please see the files below

SPEC: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/askbot-plugin-authfas.spec
SRPM: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/askbot-plugin-authfas-0.1-2.fc14.src.rpm

Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3202564

Thank you.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722192] Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722192

--- Comment #4 from David Marsh  2011-07-15 16:01:34 EDT 
---
I am not a member of the packager group so cannot. It says I need to be a
member of packager or newpackager group. The later does not seem to exist when
I search under the group list.

Anyhow, pan 0.135 installs and works great for me under fc14 x86 and fixes a
bug introduced in fc14 and 0.133 not handling preview of images beyond a
certain post size. If someone else want to compile the srpm and test / request
commit

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 719469] Review Request: kbsh - command-line shell

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719469

--- Comment #2 from Zack Parsons  2011-07-15 16:02:01 EDT ---
This is ridiculous, somebody, please review my package soon.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

--- Comment #33 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 16:00:00 EDT ---
Ah.  Learn something new every day.  Unretired, go ahead and take it, import,
etc, and you should be set.

Thanks Toshio!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

--- Comment #32 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi  2011-07-15 
15:55:27 EDT ---
Nope.  de facto policy from a long time ago is that cvsadmins control retiring
and unretiring packages.  So that's why you (John) see the unretire button but
Mo does not.

If you unretire the package, Mo will be able to assume ownership.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722249] Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722249

--- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha  2011-07-15 15:27:21 
EDT ---
Already in conversation with them. I'll keep the ticket updated.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722444] Review Request: python-celery - Distributed Task Queue

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722444

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Colin Kissa  2011-07-15 
14:54:19 EDT ---

Updated Spec and SRPM:
http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/python-celery/python-celery.spec
http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/python-celery/python-celery-2.2.7-3.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 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998

--- Comment #9 from Richard Shaw  2011-07-15 14:38:16 EDT 
---
+: OK
-: must be fixed
=: should be fixed (at your discretion)
?: Question or clairification needed
N: not applicable

MUST:
[+] rpmlint output: shown in comment: No major issues.
[+] follows package naming guidelines
[+] spec file base name matches package name
[+] package meets the packaging guidelines
[+] package uses a Fedora approved license: BSD
[+] license field matches the actual license.
[+] license file is included in %doc
[+] spec file is in American English
[+] spec file is legible
[+] sources match upstream: md5sum matches (6e182f15bf9bc8ffe95547c1cdd7e7b4)
[+] package builds on at least one primary arch: Tested F14 x86_64
[N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch
[+] all build requirements in BuildRequires
[N] spec file handles locales properly
[+] ldconfig in %post and %postun
[+] no bundled copies of system libraries
[N] no relocatable packages
[+] package owns all directories that it creates
[+] no files listed twice in %files
[+] proper permissions on files
[+] consistent use of macros
[+] code or permissible content
[N] large documentation in -doc
[+] no runtime dependencies in %doc
[+] header files in -devel
[N] static libraries in -static
[+] .so in -devel
[+] -devel requires main package
[+] package contains no libtool archives
[N] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install/validate
[+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages
[+] all filenames in UTF-8

SHOULD:
[+] query upstream for license text
[N] description and summary contains available translations
[+] package builds in mock
[+] package builds on all supported arches
[?] package functions as described
[+] sane scriptlets
[+] subpackages require the main package
[N] placement of pkgconfig files
[N] file dependencies versus package dependencies
[N] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts

Ok, it's not a big deal but the only thing I would change is:

%doc doc

to

%doc doc/*

Right now documentation is going into:

/usr/share/doc/OpenNL-3.2.1/doc

which is redundant...

Let me know what you think!

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 720447] Review Request: python-unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720447

--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 14:37:38 EDT ---
Is this to be python-unidecode or unidecode?  Also, remove fl6 and replace
epel-6 with EL-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 720447] Review Request: python-unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720447

pjp  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #6 from pjp  2011-07-15 14:28:30 EDT ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: unidecode
Short Description: Python module for US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text.
Owners: pjp
Branches: f14 f15 fl6 epel-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 720807] Review Request: askbot-plugin-authfas - Askbot plugin to facilitate FAS authentication

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720807

pjp  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
   |fas-plugin-askbot - Askbot  |askbot-plugin-authfas -
   |plugin to facilitate FAS|Askbot plugin to facilitate
   |authentication  |FAS authentication

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722444] Review Request: python-celery - Distributed Task Queue

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722444

--- Comment #2 from pjp  2011-07-15 14:20:54 EDT ---
[X] Package name - ok.
[X] Package group - ok.
[X] Build successful - ok.

[X] rpmlint SRPMS/python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.src.rpm
python-celery.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gevent -> event,
gerent, g event
python-celery.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US webhooks -> web
hooks, web-hooks, billhooks
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

  - ok.

[X] rpmlint RPMS/noarch/python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch.rpm 
python-celery.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-importlib
python-celery.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US webhooks -> web
hooks, web-hooks, billhooks
python-celery.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python-celery-2.2.7/docs/.static
python-celery.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python-celery-2.2.7/docs/.static
python-celery.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python-celery-2.2.7/docs/.templates
python-celery.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python-celery-2.2.7/docs/.templates
python-celery.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python-celery-2.2.7/docs/.static/.keep
python-celery.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/share/doc/python-celery-2.2.7/docs/.static/.keep
python-celery.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary celeryctl
python-celery.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary celeryd
python-celery.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary camqadm
python-celery.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary celeryev
python-celery.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary celeryd-multi
python-celery.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary celerybeat
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 12 warnings.

   - ...please remove the errors.


[X] Install/Un-install - fails.

# yum localinstall python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch.rpm 
Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit
Adding en_US to language list
Setting up Local Package Process
Examining python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch.rpm:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
Marking python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch.rpm to be installed
http://download.lab.bos.redhat.com/rel-eng/brew/fedora/14/repodata/repomd.xml:
[Errno 14] PYCURL ERROR 6 - ""
Trying other mirror.
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package python-celery.noarch 0:2.2.7-2.fc14 set to be installed
--> Processing Dependency: pyparsing for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
--> Processing Dependency: python-dateutil for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
--> Processing Dependency: python-importlib for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
--> Processing Dependency: python-kombu for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
--> Processing Dependency: python-multiprocessing for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
--> Running transaction check
---> Package pyparsing.noarch 0:1.5.6-1.fc14 set to be installed
---> Package python-celery.noarch 0:2.2.7-2.fc14 set to be installed
--> Processing Dependency: python-importlib for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
--> Processing Dependency: python-kombu for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
--> Processing Dependency: python-multiprocessing for package:
python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
---> Package python-dateutil.noarch 0:1.4.1-5.fc14 set to be installed
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
(/python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch)
   Requires: python-multiprocessing
Error: Package: python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
(/python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch)
   Requires: python-importlib
Error: Package: python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch
(/python-celery-2.2.7-2.fc14.noarch)
   Requires: python-kombu
 You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
 You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

--- Comment #10 from Dave Malcolm  2011-07-15 13:50:17 EDT 
---
I've removed bug 722578 from being a "blocker" for this one (which wasn't my
intention, I just wanted to mark the relationship) 

(Given that as per:
  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722578#c1
everything else seems to be affected by this, it seems unfair to this review to
have this issue block getting this package into the distro)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

Dave Malcolm  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on|722578  |

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

Dave Malcolm  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on||722578

--- Comment #9 from Dave Malcolm  2011-07-15 13:32:10 EDT 
---
I've filed bug 722578 (adding as blocking this) against python3 to track fixing
the python3 distutils bug.

As per workarounds, I believe that the extra .pyc files will be ignored:
assuming that we also have .pyc files in the correct location within the
package, then the impact is merely wasted disk space.  (Seems like an rpmlint
bug as well, 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

--- Comment #8 from Thomas Moschny  2011-07-15 13:09:35 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> My guess is that we're getting an extra set of .pyc files within the python3
> subpackage: one set in the correct location (within a __pycache__ directory),
> with the correct timestamp, and another in the wrong location (same dir as the
> .py files), as per comment #5.

Yes, that's indeed what is happening.

Is there a workaround?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

Dave Malcolm  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||needinfo?(nobody@fedoraproj
   ||ect.org)

--- Comment #6 from Dave Malcolm  2011-07-15 13:00:00 EDT 
---
Tim or Thomas: can you post the output of "rpm -qlv" on each of the built
packages as an attachment to this bug please.

My guess is that we're getting an extra set of .pyc files within the python3
subpackage: one set in the correct location (within a __pycache__ directory),
with the correct timestamp, and another in the wrong location (same dir as the
.py files), as per comment #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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

--- Comment #7 from Dave Malcolm  2011-07-15 13:00:17 EDT 
---
(or rpm -qplv, I guess)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

Tim Flink  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||dmalc...@redhat.com

--- Comment #5 from Tim Flink  2011-07-15 12:48:28 EDT ---
I spoke with dmalcom about the rpmlint errors in IRC and the current thought is
that the modifications to the .py files in %install shouldn't cause the mtime
errors showing up in rpmlint for fc15.

There was a change in .pyc location for python 3.2 as described in PEP3147
(http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3147/) and it appears that distutils has
yet to be updated to use the new location (http://bugs.python.org/issue11254).

If I'm understanding correctly, the .py files should be byte-compiled correctly
after modification in %install but something in the fc15 python3 environment is
missing them. Either way, the .pyc files won't be rebuilt every time since
they're not in the correct location to start off with due to the distutils bug

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722249] Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722249

--- Comment #3 from Brendan Jones  2011-07-15 
12:50:24 EDT ---
Hi again

Where did you get the COPYING file ?

I am really quite confused by this package. The spec file points to a project
home page which is just a git repository. I could not find any details of the
project which indicate it as being a continuation or a fork of the project
cited above (http://python-hl7.readthedocs.org/en/latest/) apart from a
copyright notice included in the header of setup.py

The HL7 specs have been pulled in by from a third repository some of which
seems to be released under Mozilla Public license 1.1 and probably constitutes
a separate project in itself.

Can you please clarify with upstream and ask them to provide the correct
license? 

This is from setup.py:

#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
#
# Copyright (C) 2009 John Paulett (john -at- 7oars.com)
# Copyright (C) 2010 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 
# All rights reserved.
#
# This software is licensed as described in the file COPYING, which
# you should have received as part of this distribution.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720989] Review Request: python-setuptools_hg - Setuptools plugin for finding files under Mercurial version control

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720989

--- Comment #6 from Praveen Kumar  2011-07-15 
12:44:55 EDT ---
Build Successfully, closed now.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

--- Comment #4 from Tim Flink  2011-07-15 12:38:35 EDT ---
Review comments:

[ MAYBE ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package
$ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/pycmd-1.0-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.lookup
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.countloc
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.which
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.cleanup
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.svnwcrevert
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.convert_unittest
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

Under F15 (i386 and x86_64) I see the following rpmlint errors:
$ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python3-pycmd-1.0-2.fc15.noarch.rpm
python3-pycmd.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.pyc
2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.py
2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.pyo
2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.py
2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.convert_unittest-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.lookup-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.svnwcrevert-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.countloc-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.cleanup-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.which-3.2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 6 warnings.

There are some questions about whether or not these errors are valid or not,
will start conversation in another comment.a

[  OK  ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming 
 Guidelines
 => Since 'py' is in the package name, it doesn't need the 'python'
prefix.

[  OK  ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [...]
[  ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[  OK  ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
 and meet the Licensing Guidelines
 => MIT License

[  OK  ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the 
 actual

[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588

--- Comment #3 from Tim Flink  2011-07-15 12:37:19 EDT ---
Created attachment 513418
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=513418
patch for finer graned file/dir ownership

I don't think that was enough to make/break the review but I added some
finer-grained file ownership for the stuff in site-packages

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 719328] Review Request: gwenview - An image viewer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719328

--- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter  2011-07-15 12:27:21 EDT 
---
Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdegraphics/gwenview.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdegraphics/gwenview-4.6.95-1.fc15.src.rpm


%changelog
* Mon Jul 11 2011 Rex Dieter  4.6.95-1
- 4.6.95
- update URL 

* Wed Jul 06 2011 Rex Dieter  4.6.90-2
- fix Source0 URL
- Conflicts: kdegraphics < 7:4.6.90-10

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 239933] Review Request: perl-Danga-Socket - Event loop and event-driven async socket base class

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239933

--- Comment #14 from Jason Tibbitts  2011-07-15 11:51:38 EDT 
---
Hmm, I interpreted Jon's comment as "it's been done" but it seems that I was
incorrect.

Can you simply mail me a list of all of the packages where you want the CC
added and I'll add it?  Please note any packages where you don't want it done
on all of devel, f15 and f14.  I know there are many, and doing one request per
ticket is kind of overkill.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720435] Review Request: epson-inkjet-printer-escpr - Drivers for Epson inkjet printers

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720435

Tim Waugh  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||twa...@redhat.com

--- Comment #3 from Tim Waugh  2011-07-15 11:44:33 EDT ---
Note that none of the PPDs have 1284DeviceId attributes, so automatic driver
installation will not work for this package.  I guess that's something that
upstream needs to be educated about.

Regarding "/usr/lib/cups", I should probably get the cups-devel package to
provide an rpm macro for driver packages to use.  Will do 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 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||a.bad...@gmail.com

--- Comment #31 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 11:42:59 EDT ---
If I do, it's news to me. :)  I am a ProvenPackager, but I doubt that's it.

Toshio, any insight?  Shouldn't Mo see Unretire?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

--- Comment #30 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 11:36:11 EDT ---
I do not see an unretire button, perhaps because you have admin rights to the
pkgdb?

I'm not looking to take ownership of either the EL branches, and just will be
pushing JRuby into rawhide as F15 and before doesn't have the necessary
dependencies.

Thanks alot.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 239933] Review Request: perl-Danga-Socket - Event loop and event-driven async socket base class

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239933

--- Comment #13 from Petr Sabata  2011-07-15 11:34:41 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Real users can simply add themselves.  Other actions require an administrator.

Which is what this request is about -- perl-sig is not a real user.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 719854] Review Request: rubygem-xmlparser-0.6.81-1 - Ruby bindings to the Expat XML parsing library

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719854

--- Comment #20 from Shawn Starr  2011-07-15 11:32:52 
EDT ---
Ulrich, if you want to help with OpenNebula packaging please come on IRC in the
#opennebula channel and chat with jmelis and me spstarr, let's coordinate :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722249] Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722249

--- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha  2011-07-15 11:29:30 
EDT ---
Hello,

(In reply to comment #1)
> Hi, 
> 
> just a few things on first look that need addressing before I go any further.
> 
> The header of setup.py states that there should be a file COPYING containing
> the license. I can't see this in the package. 

I'll add it.

> 
> Moreover, it is unclear what the HL7 specification files are referenced under.
> The reference/README.txt states 'This data comes from
> http://www.mirthcorp.com/svn' - which is a broken link. You should also
> consider moving these files to a separate package - if they can be validly
> used, the specs would be useful outside this package.

I found them here:

http://www.mirthcorp.com/community/fisheye/browse/~br=tag%3A2.1.1/Mirth/trunk/generator/reference

Would you want me to split them into a subpackage, or should I package them
separately as a different package all together?

> 
> Also, the removal of \r from these documents may be better suited to a patch.
> The output of your loop is very noisy.

Sure, I'll create one and add it.

> 
> regards,
> 
> Brendan

Thanks, I'll have the spec up in a few hours. 

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 719854] Review Request: rubygem-xmlparser-0.6.81-1 - Ruby bindings to the Expat XML parsing library

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719854

Shawn Starr  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||shawn.st...@rogers.com

--- Comment #19 from Shawn Starr  2011-07-15 11:27:37 
EDT ---
Alright, you are also trying to package xmlparser for OpenNebula 2.2+?

I also was trying to package this, and other dependencies needed.

See bug #722364

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722364] Review Request: rubygem-xmlparser - Ruby bindings for Expat

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722364

--- Comment #4 from Shawn Starr  2011-07-15 11:27:52 
EDT ---
 first beta is scheduled for beginning of next week
 after that will come a beta2
 and a release candidate
 OpenNebula 3.0 final is scheduled for end of august

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 239933] Review Request: perl-Danga-Socket - Event loop and event-driven async socket base class

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239933

--- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts  2011-07-15 11:24:02 EDT 
---
Real users can simply add themselves.  Other actions require an administrator.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722364] Review Request: rubygem-xmlparser - Ruby bindings for Expat

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722364

--- Comment #3 from Shawn Starr  2011-07-15 11:23:37 
EDT ---
Its needed for OpenNebula 3.0 (not released yet), I am working with upstream,
although it's interesting someone else is trying to package this :)

i don't care who wants to own it, we need it as a dependency however 2.2 and
3.0.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722407] Review Request: python-kombu - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722407

pjp  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-review+

--- Comment #4 from pjp  2011-07-15 11:18:09 EDT ---
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 722407] Review Request: python-kombu - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722407

--- Comment #3 from pjp  2011-07-15 11:16:45 EDT ---
[X] Package name - ok.
[X] Package group - ok.
[X] Build successful - ok.

[X] $ rpmlint SRPMS/python-kombu-1.1.3-1.fc14.src.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

  - ok.

[X] $ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/python-kombu-1.1.3-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

  - ok.

[X] Install/Un-install - ok.

Overall good.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998

--- Comment #8 from Ankur Sinha  2011-07-15 11:12:51 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Ack! I've been spoiled by "make install" :)
> 
> I've fixed it and I'm doing a mock build now to make sure. Due to the symbolic
> links the "cp" command needed "-a" not "-p". It was copying the target of the
> symlink (the real library) instead of copying the symlink itself.
> 
> Ok, done with the mock build and unfortunately cmake does not create the
> library with the correct permissions (0775 instead of 0755). There may be a 
> way
> to fix that during the build but the only reference I could find to 
> PERMISSIONS
> was during "install" and of course we are manually installing.
> 
> Also, since we can't copy them over all at once I had to use some 'find' 
> mojo. 
> 
> I know in some ways this seems like more work than what you were doing (and it
> may well be) but it's generally better not to rely on macros and hard coded
> paths whenever practical. Although in this particular case you were pretty 
> sure
> this was the last version it's best to try and keep things automatic as
> possible. I'm pretty sure if there was a new patch release you could just
> upload the new source, change the version in the spec file, and rebuild. 
> 
> Double Ack! They don't include the patch level in the version for the source
> archive file name... Oh well. I think we're close enough :)
> 
> Here's the spec file with the fixes for the library install:
> 
> http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/OpenNL.spec



Corrected/modified

http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/opennl/OpenNL-3.2.1-4.fc15.src.rpm

http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/opennl/OpenNL.spec

Now, *everything* finally looks okay :P

Thanks Richard,
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 722249] Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722249

--- Comment #1 from Brendan Jones  2011-07-15 
11:07:13 EDT ---
Hi, 

just a few things on first look that need addressing before I go any further.

The header of setup.py states that there should be a file COPYING containing
the license. I can't see this in the package. 

Moreover, it is unclear what the HL7 specification files are referenced under.
The reference/README.txt states 'This data comes from
http://www.mirthcorp.com/svn' - which is a broken link. You should also
consider moving these files to a separate package - if they can be validly
used, the specs would be useful outside this package.

Also, the removal of \r from these documents may be better suited to a patch.
The output of your loop is very noisy.

regards,

Brendan

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

--- Comment #29 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 11:03:54 EDT ---
When logged into pkgdb via my FAS account, and I'm at:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/jruby

I see Unretire Package for the devel branch, and Take Ownership for EL-5 and
EL-6.  Once you have ownership, you can submit a Package Change for any
additional branches you need, presumably f15 and possibly f14.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720447] Review Request: python-unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720447

Rahul Sundaram  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+

--- Comment #5 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-07-15 10:55:45 EDT 
---

Looks good.  Make sure you branch for EPEL 6

   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 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

--- Comment #28 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 10:51:44 EDT ---
Hrm I'm not seeing the option to do so via the pkgdb web interface, could you
elaborate on the process I need to take to get JRuby into Fedora. 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 668820] Review Request: rubygem-rdoc - RDoc produces HTML and command-line documentation for Ruby projects

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668820

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com

--- Comment #19 from Vít Ondruch  2011-07-15 10:51:22 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #18)
> > * Documentation
> >   - Please do not disable documentation generation, since ruby forces
> > installation of ruby-rdoc, therefore rdoc should be available prior the 
> > gem
> > installation
> >   - Please consider to provide the documentation in -doc subpackage
> > 
> 
> Its seems there is an issue w/ parsing the rubygem-rdoc documentation w/
> ruby-rdoc. Whenever I re-enable the --rdoc, I get the following parse error:
> 
> Generating HTML...
> ERROR:  While generating documentation for rdoc-3.8
> ... MESSAGE:   Unhandled special: Special: type=17, text=""
> ... RDOC args: --op
> /home/mmorsi/rpmbuild/BUILD/rubygem-rdoc-3.8/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rdoc-3.8/rdoc
> --main README.txt lib History.txt LICENSE.txt Manifest.txt README.txt RI.txt
> Rakefile --title rdoc-3.8 Documentation
> 
> 
> Grepping the source, it seems the offending line is in History.txt. Since from
> the rpm spec's perspective installing History.txt and parsing it w/ rdoc is an
> atomic operation, I've disabled the rdoc generation for the time being.
> 
> Added a documentation subpackage, and re-enabled ri generation.
> 
Interesting, it seems to me like bug in RubyGems. I have replaced the gem
install with following command:

GEM_HOME="%{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}%{gemdir}" gem install --local \
-V --force %{SOURCE0}

Which works without any issues and the result should be identical to use of
"--install-dir" command line flag.


> (In reply to comment #8)
> > P.S. It is interesting that in Ruby, there were left bundled RDoc, which is
> > against Fedora policy anyway. Of course it is not the only one library 
> > bundled
> > in Ruby.
> 
> True but you have to recall that rdoc was originally part of the Ruby package
> then got forked off into the gem. At some point it wouldn't surprise me if it
> was dropped from ruby internally all together (though this would make it 
> harder
> for rdoc support in rubygems and what not).

I didn't know that the RDoc was forked out of Ruby. Interesting. There was
discussion that since RubyGems are integrated into R1.9, some parts of stdlib
should be moved away from core to gems, but unfortunately, it went in nothing
:/

So I have some more nits:

* There should be used %global instead of %define
  -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define

* Some files are listed twice:
  warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rdoc-3.8/History.txt
  warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rdoc-3.8/LICENSE.txt
  warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rdoc-3.8/Manifest.txt
  warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rdoc-3.8/README.txt
  warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rdoc-3.8/RI.txt
  warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rdoc-3.8/Rakefile
  - Except the LICENSE.txt, I would move them in to -doc subpackage.
  - May be you just forgot the %dir directive in front of 
"%{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/" line? Btw this could be replaced
shorter %{geminstdir} macro

* rpmlint complains about "macro-in-comment"
  - Please remove the macros from comments.
  - Also, the "--bindir .%{_bindir}" flag for gem installation might help
to avoid later messing with the bin directory.

I have no other objections at this point. If you fix these issues and nobody
else has objections, I will approve this package at Monday.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720447] Review Request: python-unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720447

--- Comment #4 from pjp  2011-07-15 10:50:19 EDT ---
I've made the changes. Please see:

SPEC: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/python-unidecode.spec
SRPM: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/python-unidecode-0.04.7-3.fc14.src.rpm

koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3201515

Thank you.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

--- Comment #27 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:42:31 EDT ---
Actually you may just be able to go into pkgdb and unretire now, I know there
have been changes of late.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720804] Review Request: kross-interpreters - Kross interpreters

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720804

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2011-07-15 10:36:43

--- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter  2011-07-15 10:36:43 EDT 
---
imported

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708473] Review Request: mingw32-cxxtest - cxxtest for mingw32

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708473

Erik van Pienbroek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ASSIGNED
 CC||erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl
   ||,
   ||fedora-mingw@lists.fedorapr
   ||oject.org
 Resolution|ERRATA  |
   Keywords||Reopened

--- Comment #9 from Erik van Pienbroek  2011-07-15 
10:33:46 EDT ---
I'm re-opening this review ticket as I don't agree with the 'review' which was
done here. The .spec file which is attached here doesn't even build in mock!
The .spec file which was imported in rawhide is in a bit better shape, but
still not compliant with the general Fedora packaging guidelines and the
MinGW-specific packaging guidelines:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MinGW

I'll do a proper review now based on what's now in rawhide (3.10.1-4.fc16).

The Source0 and Source1 URL's are invalid:
$ spectool -g mingw32-cxxtest.spec 
Getting
http://cxxtest.tigris.org/files/documents/6421/43281/mingw32-cxxtest-3.10.1.tar.gz
to ./mingw32-cxxtest-3.10.1.tar.gz
  % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time  Current
 Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft  Speed
  0 00 00 0  0  0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 0
curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404
Getting
http://cxxtest.tigris.org/files/documents/6421/43284/mingw32-cxxtest-guide-3.10.1.pdf
to ./mingw32-cxxtest-guide-3.10.1.pdf
  % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time  Current
 Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft  Speed
  0 00 00 0  0  0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 0
curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404

Please use working URLs or add a comment how the .tar.gz can be regenerated

As your only targeting F-15 and rawhide, several things can be dropped from the
.spec file like the BuildRoot tag, the 'rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT' from the
%install phase, the entire %clean section and the %defattr lines from both
subpackages. The conditionals for fedora < 11 and rhel can also be dropped as
they're unneeded when you only target F-15 and rawhide.

Why are you bundling the python pieces with this package? We don't have python
support in the MinGW toolchain in Fedora so the python pieces are kinda
useless. The python code and the -doc subpackage are also bundled with the
native Fedora cxxtest package so they can both the dropped from the mingw
package. 

Is it correct that this package only provides some C++ header files? If that's
the case then the two %global overrides can be dropped as they only apply to
mingw binaries. Do note however that when this package starts to bundle
binaries that several overrides need to be added (for dependency and debuginfo
extraction). See the Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines for an example.

If you aren't bundling any mingw binaries then you need add to a Requires:
mingw32-filesystem manually.

Why was this package imported as mingw32-cxxtest? The current Fedora MinGW
guidelines strongly suggest to name new packages mingw-, so that in the future
it would be easier to build mingw64- binary packages. Now that you've used
mingw32- source package naming, you'll have to retire mingw32-cxxtest and
re-review mingw-cxxtest once the mingw64 compiler is ready, probably in the F17
timeframe

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 719342] Review Request: okular - A document viewer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719342

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2011-07-15 10:35:41

--- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter  2011-07-15 10:35:41 EDT 
---
imported.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 239933] Review Request: perl-Danga-Socket - Event loop and event-driven async socket base class

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239933

--- Comment #11 from Petr Sabata  2011-07-15 10:34:38 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> This is now done via pkgdb.

We can now add other users to our packages?  How?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998

--- Comment #7 from Richard Shaw  2011-07-15 10:29:49 EDT 
---
Ack! I've been spoiled by "make install" :)

I've fixed it and I'm doing a mock build now to make sure. Due to the symbolic
links the "cp" command needed "-a" not "-p". It was copying the target of the
symlink (the real library) instead of copying the symlink itself.

Ok, done with the mock build and unfortunately cmake does not create the
library with the correct permissions (0775 instead of 0755). There may be a way
to fix that during the build but the only reference I could find to PERMISSIONS
was during "install" and of course we are manually installing.

Also, since we can't copy them over all at once I had to use some 'find' mojo. 

I know in some ways this seems like more work than what you were doing (and it
may well be) but it's generally better not to rely on macros and hard coded
paths whenever practical. Although in this particular case you were pretty sure
this was the last version it's best to try and keep things automatic as
possible. I'm pretty sure if there was a new patch release you could just
upload the new source, change the version in the spec file, and rebuild. 

Double Ack! They don't include the patch level in the version for the source
archive file name... Oh well. I think we're close enough :)

Here's the spec file with the fixes for the library install:

http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/OpenNL.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 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

--- Comment #26 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 10:28:20 EDT ---
rel-eng trac ticket:  https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4822

Though according to this

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_a_Deprecated_Package

We still go through BZ to assign ownership of the JRuby package. Is this not
correct?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539693

--- Comment #46 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:26:40 EDT ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).

No worries, 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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539693

--- Comment #45 from Elder Marco  2011-07-15 10:23:25 EDT 
---
Hello Jon, 

We apologize.

Package Change Request
==
Package Name: plowshare
New Branches: f15
Owners: hubbitus eldermarco
InitialCC: 

Fedora 15, new 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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539693

Elder Marco  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722187] Review Request: usbredir - USB network redirection protocol libraries

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722187

--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:22:07 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 720664] Review Request: django-threaded-multihost - Enable multi-site awareness in Django apps

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720664

--- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:18:15 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 721069] Review Request: rubygem-aeolus-image - Commandline interface for working with the Aeolus cloud suite

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721069

Mo Morsi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
   |rubygem-aeolus-cli -|rubygem-aeolus-image -
   |Commandline interface for   |Commandline interface for
   |working with the Aeolus |working with the Aeolus
   |cloud suite |cloud suite

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 721069] Review Request: rubygem-aeolus-image - Commandline interface for working with the Aeolus cloud suite

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721069

--- Comment #3 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 10:17:07 EDT ---
Koji Build:  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3201364

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 719342] Review Request: okular - A document viewer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719342

--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:17:10 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 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||l...@jcomserv.net
   Flag|fedora-cvs? |

--- Comment #25 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:14:48 EDT ---
Already in Fedora, will require a rel-eng trac.  Thank you!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 721069] Review Request: rubygem-aeolus-cli - Commandline interface for working with the Aeolus cloud suite

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721069

--- Comment #2 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 10:15:25 EDT ---
Rebuilt the rpms w/ the changed name and to comply to more Fedora guidelines

Spec: http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-aeolus-image.spec
SRPM:
http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-aeolus-image-0.0.1-2.fc15.src.rpm

Changes to the specfile submitted to list here

https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/aeolus-devel/2011-July/003182.html

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 713159] Review Request: rubygem-rbvmomi - Ruby interface to the VMware vSphere API

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=713159

--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:15:53 EDT ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Corrected EL-6 branch 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 699335] Review Request: python-coffin - Jinja2 adapter for Django

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=699335

--- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:14:02 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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539693

--- Comment #44 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:12:45 EDT ---
Since this already exists, please submit this as a Package Change request
and not New Package.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure#Package_Change_Requests_for_existing_packages

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 475141] Review Request: python-imdb - Retrieve and manage the data of the IMDb movie database

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475141

--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:09:04 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 252257] Review Request: perl-mogilefs-server - Server part of the MogileFS distributed filesystem

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=252257

--- Comment #28 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:08:23 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 252104] Review Request: perl-Perlbal-XS-HTTPHeaders - Perlbal extension for processing HTTP headers

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=252104

--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:06:56 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 245655] Review Request: perl-Gearman - Distributed job system

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245655

--- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:03:38 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 245697] Review Request: perl-Gearman-Server - Function call "router" and load balancer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245697

Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||l...@jcomserv.net

--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:04:49 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 240699] Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Client library for the MogileFS distributed file system

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=240699

--- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:01:53 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 246356] Review Request: perl-Gearman-Client-Async - Asynchronous Client for the Gearman distributed job system

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=246356

--- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:05:20 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 239933] Review Request: perl-Danga-Socket - Event loop and event-driven async socket base class

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239933

--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:01:09 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 245419] Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Utils - Utilities for MogileFS

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245419

--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:02:46 EDT ---
This is now done via pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549

--- Comment #49 from Michal Fojtik  2011-07-15 09:58:26 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #47)
> Package Change Request
> ==
> Package Name: rubygem-haml
> New Branches: el5 el6
> Owners: stahnma

Can you please import this gem into EPEL6?

Error: No Package found for rubygem(haml)

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 239369] Review Request: perl-Sys-Syscall - Access system calls that Perl doesn't normally provide access to

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239369

--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 10:00:10 EDT ---
This is now done through pkgdb.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 721066] Review Request: rubygem-image_factory_console - QMF Console for Aeolus Image Factory

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721066

--- Comment #2 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 09:51:38 EDT ---
Spec: http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-image_factory_console.spec
SRPM:
http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-image_factory_console-0.4.0-2.fc15.src.rpm


(In reply to comment #1)
> Initial review:
> 
> 1)  There is no COPYING or LICENSE file in the sources.  We should fix that in
> the upstream aeolus repository, to make it clear what license this particular
> piece of code is under.

Agreed, though from the Fedora submission perspective, not a blocker.


> 2)  Even if we take the GPLv2+ as the license (which is what the rest of the
> conductor is under), the license listed in the SPEC is wrong.  It says GPLv2+
> or Ruby, which is not true; it is just GPLv2+

Done


> 3)  No need for a BuildRoot anymore
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag)

Done


> 4)  No need for a %clean section anymore
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean)

Done


> 5)  No need for %defattr in %files
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions)

Done


> 6)  We probably want to make the Requires: rubygems and BuildRequires: 
> rubygems
> into Requires: ruby(rubygems) and BuildRequires: ruby(rubygems), respectively.

Hrm, why? The guidelines state "The package must have a Requires and a
BuildRequires on rubygems"

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#Ruby_Gems



> [ FAIL ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
> The Source of the package must be the full URL to the released Gem archive
> See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Gems
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL - clalance: this is a bit
> problematic in that we don't have releases separate from the main conductor
> code.  We should probably follow the recommendations in the SourceURL link
> above and put a comment in describing how to generate the gem.

Done



> [ FAIL ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the 
>  actual license

Done

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 721066] Review Request: rubygem-image_factory_console - QMF Console for Aeolus Image Factory

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721066

--- Comment #3 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 09:52:19 EDT ---
Also here is the koji build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3201285

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 630184] Review Request: lxappearance-obconf - Plugin to configure Openbox inside LXAppearance

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630184

Richard Shaw  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+

--- Comment #12 from Richard Shaw  2011-07-15 09:48:58 
EDT ---
+: OK
-: must be fixed
=: should be fixed (at your discretion)
?: Question or clairification needed
N: not applicable

MUST:
[+] rpmlint output: shown in comment: No major issues.
[+] follows package naming guidelines (assuming this is a pre-release package)
[+] spec file base name matches package name
[+] package meets the packaging guidelines
[+] package uses a Fedora approved license: GPLv2+
[+] license field matches the actual license.
[+] license file is included in %doc
[+] spec file is in American English
[+] spec file is legible
[+] sources match upstream: recursive diff of git checkout against source
produced no output.
[+] package builds on at least one primary arch: Tested F14 x86_64 and F15
x86_64
[N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch
[+] all build requirements in BuildRequires
[+] spec file handles locales properly
[N] ldconfig in %post and %postun
[+] no bundled copies of system libraries
[N] no relocatable packages
[+] package owns all directories that it creates
[+] no files listed twice in %files
[+] proper permissions on files
[+] consistent use of macros
[+] code or permissible content
[N] large documentation in -doc
[+] no runtime dependencies in %doc
[N] header files in -devel
[N] static libraries in -static
[N] .so in -devel
[N] -devel requires main package
[+] package contains no libtool archives
[N] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install/validate
[+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages
[+] all filenames in UTF-8

SHOULD:
[N] query upstream for license text
[N] description and summary contains available translations
[+] package builds in mock
[+] package builds on all supported arches
[?] package functions as described: I haven't had a chance to test the package.
[+] sane scriptlets
[N] subpackages require the main package
[N] placement of pkgconfig files
[N] file dependencies versus package dependencies
[N] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts

I have remotely installed the package but have not had a chance to test it on
my one LXDE box (MythTV Box). I'm going to assume (unless you say otherwise)
that you've tested the functionality of the current git version and call this
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 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998

--- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha  2011-07-15 09:37:56 
EDT ---
Hi Richard,

Not sure what's going on here:

# Mock says this during the build:
# DEBUG: *** WARNING: identical binaries are copied, not linked:
# DEBUG: /usr/lib/libopennl.so.3.2.1
# DEBUG:and  /usr/lib/libopennl.so.3

# DEBUG: *** WARNING: identical binaries are copied, not linked:
# DEBUG: /usr/lib/libopennl.so
# DEBUG:and  /usr/lib/libopennl.so.3.2.1
# Manually creating a symlink

So, instead of symlinking, it's creating new files? 

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 711462] Review Request: perl-Fedora-Rebuild - Rebuilds Fedora packages from scratch

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711462

--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  
2011-07-15 09:16:08 EDT ---
perl-Fedora-Rebuild-0.5.1-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Fedora-Rebuild-0.5.1-1.fc14

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 721063] Review Request: rubygem-factory_girl_rails - factory_girl_rails provides integration between factory_girl and rails 3

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721063

--- Comment #2 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 09:15:12 EDT ---
Spec: http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-factory_girl_rails.spec
SRPM:
http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-factory_girl_rails-1.0.1-2.fc15.src.rpm

(In reply to comment #1)
> Initial review:
> 
> 1)  There are a few lines in there that have trailing whitespace (like
> Requires: ruby); not a huge problem, but nice to clean up.

Done.

> 2)  The license is wrong; the spec says GPLv2+ or Ruby (which I know is the
> default gem2rpm output), but the actual license of the gem is MIT.


Done.

> 
> [clalance@localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint
> rubygem-factory_girl_rails-1.0.1-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
> rubygem-factory_girl_rails.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C
> factory_girl_rails provides integration between factory_girl and rails 3
> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
> 
> We can probably change that summary to "Provides integration between
> factory_girl and rails 3"

Done


> [ FAIL ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the 
>  actual license

Done


> [ FAIL ] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
>  %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).

rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install is no longer needed

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 711462] Review Request: perl-Fedora-Rebuild - Rebuilds Fedora packages from scratch

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711462

--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  
2011-07-15 09:15:05 EDT ---
perl-Fedora-Rebuild-0.5.1-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Fedora-Rebuild-0.5.1-1.fc15

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 475141] Review Request: python-imdb - Retrieve and manage the data of the IMDb movie database

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475141

Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||l...@jcomserv.net
   Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla  2011-07-15 09:08:10 EDT ---
Package Change Request
==
Package Name: python-imdb
New Branches: el6
Owners: limb

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 630184] Review Request: lxappearance-obconf - Plugin to configure Openbox inside LXAppearance

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630184

--- Comment #11 from Richard Shaw  2011-07-15 08:55:21 
EDT ---
Ack! I don't think I'm ever going to get this without getting my law degree :)

Perhaps the License wiki needs to be updated to be more clear :) Library and
Lesser both starting with L makes things confusing (not that GNU licenses need
any help in that department.)

Ok, I'm almost done going through the checklist.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 561484] Review Request: jruby - Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561484

Mo Morsi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #24 from Mo Morsi  2011-07-15 08:39:25 EDT ---
Actually thinking about it, it might be possible to use the builtin gems to
build jruby, and then remove them before jruby is installed, so that we are not
depending on any external gems which still not shipping anything vendored.

That being said, as Alexander mentioned the gems are just a build time
dependency to build jruby itself, and do not get pulled in at runtime. Thus
this can move forward and we can tidy up the build process as we go along.


Thanks for the package review and approval Alexander!


New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: jruby
Short Description: Pure Java implementation of the Ruby interpreter
Owners: mmorsi
Branches:
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 719342] Review Request: okular - A document viewer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719342

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter  2011-07-15 08:21:55 EDT 
---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: okular
Short Description: A document viewer
Owners: than rdieter jreznik ltinkl rnovacek kkofler
Branches: f15

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722458] New: Review Request: perl-Sys-Hostname-Long - Perl module for obtaining full hostnames

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: perl-Sys-Hostname-Long - Perl module for obtaining 
full hostnames

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722458

   Summary: Review Request: perl-Sys-Hostname-Long - Perl module
for obtaining full hostnames
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: and...@topdog.za.net
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
  Story Points: ---


Spec URL:
http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/perl-Sys-Hostname-Long/perl-Sys-Hostname-Long.spec
SRPM URL:
http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/perl-Sys-Hostname-Long/perl-Sys-Hostname-Long-1.4-1.fc15.src.rpm
Description: This module lets you query the host full name in perl on a variety
of operating systems.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722187] Review Request: usbredir - USB network redirection protocol libraries

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722187

Hans de Goede  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #2 from Hans de Goede  2011-07-15 07:26:20 EDT 
---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: usbredir
Short Description: USB network redirection protocol libraries
Owners: jwrdegoede
Branches: f15
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722444] Review Request: python-celery - Distributed Task Queue

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722444

pjp  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 722444] Review Request: python-celery - Distributed Task Queue

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722444

Andrew Colin Kissa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fab...@bernewireless.net

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Colin Kissa  2011-07-15 
07:11:32 EDT ---
*** Bug 611277 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review