[Bug 662259] Review Request: git-annex - Manage files with git, without checking their contents in
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662259 --- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen 2011-08-19 03:04:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > I originally started to, but as I got into it, all of the Haskell-specific > stuff creeped me out. That's ok - I was just asking yes/no? :) Anyway not as many weird macros in non-library Cabal packages. :) I just note in passing that the Fonts packaging macros also generate %files sections automagically for example. I haven't received any comments so far from the packaging list on the revised Haskell Guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662259] Review Request: git-annex - Manage files with git, without checking their contents in
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662259 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||notready -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729512] Review Request: graphite2 - Font rendering capabilities for complex non-Roman writing systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729512
Martin Gieseking changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Martin Gieseking 2011-08-19
03:13:50 EDT ---
OK, great. The package looks fine now. Just two (optional) suggestions:
- Move %post and %postun behind the %install section (and before %files).
It's just the common location.
- %{_libdir}/libgraphite2.so.2.0.0 is a bit too precise. :) In order to
simplify future updates, I suggest to avoid mentioning the soversion:
%{_libdir}/libgraphite2.so.*
But that's optional. The package is ready anyway.
$ rpmlint ./graphite2-*.rpm
graphite2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gr2fonttest
graphite2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary comparerenderer
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
- LGPLv2+ according to source file headers
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum graphite2-1.0.2.tgz*
3115c721f5cb7c464f01c2dddccfaba6 graphite2-1.0.2.tgz
3115c721f5cb7c464f01c2dddccfaba6 graphite2-1.0.2.tgz.1
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
- koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3285384
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[+] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[+] MUST: If a package contains .so files with a suffix, then .so (without
suffix) must go in a -devel package.
[+] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
EPEL <= 5 only:
[X] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field.
[X] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[X] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[X] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[+] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itsel
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 --- Comment #4 from Tim Waugh 2011-08-19 04:24:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > [OK] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. > Do we need the -doc subpackage for 4 txt files having 32KiB in sum ? No, probably not. > [-] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it > doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. > There's no man page for pyppd but the usage is described in README.txt so I > would ship that file in the main package. I'll do that. Upstream already has "add a man-page" on the to-do list. Updated URLs: Spec URL: http://twaugh.fedorapeople.org/pyppd/pyppd.spec SRPM URL: http://twaugh.fedorapeople.org/pyppd/pyppd-0.4.9-1.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728649] Review Request: airrac - C++ Simulated Revenue Accounting (RAC) System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728649
--- Comment #3 from Martin Gieseking 2011-08-19
04:27:10 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> [ BAD ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
> format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. ===> Needs to be
> renamed to airrac.spec
Right. However, the spec in the srpm is named correctly. It's just the name of
the separately linked spec that doesn't satisfy the guidelines.
> [ OK ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
> source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this
> task.
Please always add the checksums (md5sum, sha1sum,...) of both tarballs to your
reviews so that we can easily verify their identity.
> ===> I could not build rpm from provided srpm using 'mock -r fedora-15-x86_64
> --rebuild airrac-0.1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm' -- seems like problem with tex, sorry
> if
> it was my bad due to unapproriate usage of mock.
You ran mock correctly. ;) The package doesn't build because of the two missing
BRs python-devel and zeromq-devel.
> [ OK ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
> for
> any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
> inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
Not OK since BRs are missing, see above.
> [ OK ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does
> not
> create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
> create that directory.
Not OK: %{_datadir}/%{name}/ is unowned. Denis, add "%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}/"
to the devel package to fix it.
> [ BAD ] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must
> be
> removed in the spec if they are built. ===> I am not sure about that, are
> there
> any .la archives created? If not, consider it as OK.
There are no .la files created, so this is OK.
> [ BAD ] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
> separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
> ===> No license file included.
File COPYING is present in the base and doc package (see corresponding %files
section) ==> this is OK.
> [ BAD ] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
> package using a fully versioned dependency. ===> doc package doesn't require
> the base package.
That's OK. Plain doc packages don't have to require the base package as there
are useful without it.
=
$ rpmlint *.rpm
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
- LGPLv2+ according to manpages
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[X] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
- missing BRs: python-devel, zeromq-devel
[+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[+] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[X] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
- %{_datadir}/%{name}/ is unowned
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[+] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[+] MUST: If a package contains .so files with a suffix, then .so files without
suffix must go in a -devel package.
[+] MUST: devel packages
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 Jiri Popelka changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jiri Popelka 2011-08-19 04:35:09 EDT --- Great. This package is Approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731643] Review Request: virt-who - Agent for reporting virtual guest IDs to subscription-manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731643 Jaroslav Reznik changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Reznik 2011-08-19 04:55:41 EDT --- Name: ok (upstream) Version: ok Release: ok Summary: ok Group: ok License: ok URL: ok Sources: ok (md5sum 7cb04432cf3942df9219ebafe7b97338) BuildRequires: ok Requires: ok Description: ok Macros consistency: ok Docs section: ok Package owns dirs/files: ok Package builds: ok (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3285541) Python packaging guidelines: ok rpmlint virt-who-0.1-2.fc15.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Simple package, no problems, 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 731643] Review Request: virt-who - Agent for reporting virtual guest IDs to subscription-manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731643 Radek Novacek changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Radek Novacek 2011-08-19 05:07:37 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: virt-who Short Description: Agent for reporting virtual guest IDs to subscription-manager Owners: rnovacek Branches: f14 f15 f16 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 604971] Review Request: jwm - Joe's Window Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604971 --- Comment #15 from Mario Blättermann 2011-08-19 05:42:25 EDT --- Such a scriptlet is not needed, because the currently included *.desktop file controls the JWM session only. It is not intended to be a launcher which people can use to start JWM from a menu. That's why, there remains just one issue, to make xterm a runtime dependency for the convenience of users. The "JWM-Gnome" entry for the display manager would be fine to have, but is not a blocker. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731966] New: Review Request: openstack-glance - OpenStack Image Service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: openstack-glance - OpenStack Image Service https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731966 Summary: Review Request: openstack-glance - OpenStack Image Service Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mar...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- This is OpenStack's Image Service. It is written in python, so closely follows the python packaging guidelines. There are two sub-packages - python-glance and openstack-glance-doc - as well as the main package. It is required by openstack-nova, see bug #707199 Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/markmc/openstack-fedora-specs/014f8941/SPECS/openstack-glance.spec SRPM URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3279387&name=openstack-glance-2011.3-0.1.987bzr.fc16.src.rpm Scratch Koji Build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3279386 Fedora 16 yum repo URL: http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/markmc/openstack/fedora-openstack.repo Description: OpenStack Image Service (code-named Glance) provides discovery, registration, and delivery services for virtual disk images. The Image Service API server provides a standard REST interface for querying information about virtual disk images stored in a variety of back-end stores, including OpenStack Object Storage. Clients can register new virtual disk images with the Image Service, query for information on publicly available disk images, and use the Image Service's client library for streaming virtual disk images. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707199] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=731966 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731966] Review Request: openstack-glance - OpenStack Image Service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731966 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731966] Review Request: openstack-glance - OpenStack Image Service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731966 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||707199 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707199] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||731966 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648093] Review Request: ghc-attoparsec-enumerator - Convert an Attoparsec parser into an iteratee
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648093 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||ghc-attoparsec-enum -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648093] Review Request: ghc-attoparsec-enumerator - Convert an Attoparsec parser into an iteratee
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648093 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||731972 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731972] Review Request: cab - Haskell Cabal package maintenance program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731972 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-haskell-list@redhat. ||com Depends on||648093(ghc-attoparsec-enum) Blocks||634048(Haskell-pkg-reviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731972] New: Review Request: cab - Haskell Cabal package maintenance program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: cab - Haskell Cabal package maintenance program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731972 Summary: Review Request: cab - Haskell Cabal package maintenance program Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: peter...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/cab/cab.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/cab/cab-0.1.5-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: A helper program to use Cabal, ghc-pkg, cabal-install, and cabal-dev from one consistent command. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 712659] Review Request : yi - An extensible text editor written in Haskell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712659 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|703502(ghc-executable-path) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 712659] Review Request : yi - An extensible text editor written in Haskell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712659 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|712270(ghc-derive) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 712270] Review Request: derive - A program and library to derive instances for data types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712270 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|712659(yi) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 703502] Review Request: ghc-executable-path - Haskell library to find full path of an executable
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703502 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|712659(yi) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648246] Review Request: ghc-data-default - A class for types with a default value
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648246 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(maths...@gmail.co ||m) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 Tim Waugh changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Tim Waugh 2011-08-19 06:29:40 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pyppd Short Description: PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS Owners: twaugh jpopelka Branches: f15 f16 el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725614] Review Request: libcryptui - Library for prompting for GPG keys
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725614 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-19 06:45:31 EDT --- libcryptui-3.1.4-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libcryptui-3.1.4-3.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725614] Review Request: libcryptui - Library for prompting for GPG keys
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725614 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729201] Review Request: zypper - Command line software manager using libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729201 Bug 729201 depends on bug 729199, which changed state. Bug 729199 Summary: Review Request: satsolver - Dependency solving library for libzypp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729200] Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200 Bug 729200 depends on bug 729199, which changed state. Bug 729199 Summary: Review Request: satsolver - Dependency solving library for libzypp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729203] Review Request: fedora-package-config-zypp - Fedora package repository configuration for zypper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729203 Bug 729203 depends on bug 729199, which changed state. Bug 729199 Summary: Review Request: satsolver - Dependency solving library for libzypp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729201] Review Request: zypper - Command line software manager using libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729201 Bug 729201 depends on bug 729200, which changed state. Bug 729200 Summary: Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729203] Review Request: fedora-package-config-zypp - Fedora package repository configuration for zypper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729203 Bug 729203 depends on bug 729200, which changed state. Bug 729200 Summary: Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729201] Review Request: zypper - Command line software manager using libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729201 T.C. Hollingsworth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-08-19 06:48:42 --- Comment #4 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-19 06:48:42 EDT --- Closing because this is blocked on bug729200. I'm deleting the SRPMS to save my horribly close disk quota but I'll leave the specfiles up for future contributors interested in packaging this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729200] Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200 T.C. Hollingsworth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-08-19 06:47:02 --- Comment #5 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-19 06:47:02 EDT --- libzypp currently doesn't find noarch and multiarch packages on Fedora, and upstream is being totally unresponsive on the issue, so I'm closing this for now. I'll delete the SRPMS to save my consistently close disk quota but I'll leave the specs up for future contributors interested in packaging this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729199] Review Request: satsolver - Dependency solving library for libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 T.C. Hollingsworth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-08-19 06:48:24 --- Comment #15 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-19 06:48:24 EDT --- Closing because this is blocked on bug729200. I'm deleting the SRPMS to save my horribly close disk quota but I'll leave the specfiles up for future contributors interested in packaging this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729201] Review Request: zypper - Command line software manager using libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729201 Bug 729201 depends on bug 729203, which changed state. Bug 729203 Summary: Review Request: fedora-package-config-zypp - Fedora package repository configuration for zypper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729203 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729203] Review Request: fedora-package-config-zypp - Fedora package repository configuration for zypper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729203 T.C. Hollingsworth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-08-19 06:48:59 --- Comment #2 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-19 06:48:59 EDT --- Closing because this is blocked on bug729200. I'm deleting the SRPMS to save my horribly close disk quota but I'll leave the specfiles up for future contributors interested in packaging this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731980] Review Request: openstack-novaclient - Client for OpenStack Nova API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731980 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||707199 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707199] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||731980 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731794] Review Request: Qt Quick 3D - Qt 3D for QML scripts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731794 --- Comment #1 from TomasM 2011-08-19 07:04:01 EDT --- Created attachment 519015 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=519015 Demo RPM spec file (unclean) Spec file for building separately from Qt 4 build. Binary RPMs shouldn't have any conflicts with Qt from rawhide or kde-redhat. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731794] Review Request: Qt Quick 3D - Qt 3D for QML scripts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731794 --- Comment #2 from TomasM 2011-08-19 07:07:17 EDT --- Apologies; specfile does not contain download location for Source6: ftp://ftp.qt.nokia.com/qt3d/noarch/2011_05_18/qtquick3d-tp1-src.tar.gz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731980] New: Review Request: openstack-novaclient - Client for OpenStack Nova API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: openstack-novaclient - Client for OpenStack Nova API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731980 Summary: Review Request: openstack-novaclient - Client for OpenStack Nova API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mar...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- This is a python API and command line client for OpenStack's Compute Service (Nova) API. There are two sub-packages - python-novaclient and openstack-novaclient-doc - as well as the main package. It is required by openstack-nova, see bug #707199 Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/markmc/openstack-fedora-specs/06604ba9/SPECS/openstack-novaclient.spec SRPM URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3285697&name=openstack-novaclient-2.6.1-0.2.83bzr.fc16.src.rpm Scratch Koji Build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3285696 Fedora 16 yum repo URL: http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/markmc/openstack/fedora-openstack.repo Description: This is a client for the OpenStack Nova API. There's a Python API (the novaclient module), and a command-line script (nova). Each implements 100% of the OpenStack Nova API. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676335] Review Request: dmtcp - Checkpoint/Restart functionality for Linux processes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676335 --- Comment #23 from Neal Becker 2011-08-19 07:20:27 EDT --- 1. should own it's doc dir: rpm -qf /usr/share/doc/dmtcp-1.2.3/ file /usr/share/doc/dmtcp-1.2.3 is not owned by any package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731643] Review Request: virt-who - Agent for reporting virtual guest IDs to subscription-manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731643 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-19 07:55:22 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 705363] Review Request: spacewalk-web - Spacewalk Web site packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705363 --- Comment #8 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-19 07:56:38 EDT --- BTW: those file permission are fixed directly in upstream therefore included in tar.gz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 705363] Review Request: spacewalk-web - Spacewalk Web site packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705363 --- Comment #7 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-19 07:54:45 EDT --- SPEC: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/spacewalk-web/spacewalk-web.spec SRPM: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/spacewalk-web/spacewalk-web-1.6.14-1.fc15.src.rpm This is again rebase. That is because I'm part of upstream and rpm is our primary format. And I put all fixes to upstream too and immediately release new version. I addressed all issue. Sorry for that missing tar.gz, it should be always automatically uploaded, but something recently broke. I uploaded it manualy for now. > Notice: perl(PXT::Config) (and /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/PXT/Config.pm) is > provided by two packages: spacewalk-base-minimal and spacewalk-pxt. Is it > intentional? Yes, it is intentional. PXT is quite standalone (but still part of Spacewalk and primary developed for spacewalk) so it is included directly in that sub-package and we do not want to force potential user to install spacewalk-base. On the other hand we need PXT/Config.pm on Spacewalk proxy and to read monitoring configuration files, but we do not need there whole PXT. Therefore it is packaged in -minimal sub-package together with additional essential files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-19 07:58:58 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 676335] Review Request: dmtcp - Checkpoint/Restart functionality for Linux processes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676335 --- Comment #24 from Neal Becker 2011-08-19 07:59:12 EDT --- 2. Why is the lib package called libdmtcpaware1, rather than just libdmtcpaware? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707199] Review Request: openstack-nova - OpenStack Compute (nova)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707199 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ogelbukh@mirantis | |.com), | |needinfo?(ogelbukh@mirantis | |.com) | --- Comment #13 from Mark McLoughlin 2011-08-19 08:27:04 EDT --- Since this review has stalled, I've gone ahead and done some further work on the package. I've also filed bug #731966 for glance and bug #731980 for novaclient. Matt, can you review the new package? Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/markmc/openstack-fedora-specs/014f8941/SPECS/openstack-nova.spec SRPM URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3279389&name=openstack-nova-2011.3-0.1.1449bzr.fc16.src.rpm Scratch Koji Build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3279388 Fedora 16 yum repo URL: http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/markmc/openstack/fedora-openstack.repo Description: OpenStack Compute (codename Nova) is open source software designed to provision and manage large networks of virtual machines, creating a redundant and scalable cloud computing platform. It gives you the software, control panels, and APIs required to orchestrate a cloud, including running instances, managing networks, and controlling access through users and projects. OpenStack Compute strives to be both hardware and hypervisor agnostic, currently supporting a variety of standard hardware configurations and seven major hypervisors. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 726131] Review Request: yourls - your own url shortening service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726131
Martin Gieseking changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
--- Comment #11 from Martin Gieseking 2011-08-19
09:32:35 EDT ---
Here's the formal review. The package is almost ready. There are two things
left that need to be fixed:
- The package contains several files under different licenses, so we have a
multiple licensing scenario here:
* yourls files: GPL+
* GeoIP files: LGPLv2+
* JQuery files: MIT or GPLv2
=> the License field should look like this:
GPL+ and LGPLv2+ and (MIT or GPLv2)
Also, add a comment about the multiple licensing scenario and the
corresponding files above the License field.
- Since the yourls archive doesn't contain a license file, ask upstream to
add one to a future release.
- Some of the doc files have DOS line endings (see rpmlint output). You can
fix this by adding the following loop to the %prep section:
for f in *.txt; do
sed 's/\r//' $f > $f.new &&
touch -r $f $f.new &&
mv $f.new $f
done
$ rpmlint *.rpm
yourls.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/yourls-1.5/sample-public-api.php.txt
yourls.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/yourls-1.5/sample-public-front-page.php.txt
yourls.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/yourls-1.5/changelog.txt
yourls.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/yourls-1.5/sample-remote-api-call.php.txt
yourls.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://yourls.googlecode.com/files/yourls-1.5.zip HTTP Error 404: Not Found
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
- multiple licensing scenario:
* GeoIP: LGPLv2+
* JQuery: MIT or GPLv2
[X] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum yourls-1.5.zip*
fa32943f7d669640f08670ecdcde5ad1 yourls-1.5.zip
fa32943f7d669640f08670ecdcde5ad1 yourls-1.5.zip.upstream
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture.
[.] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
EPEL <= 5 only:
[+] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field.
[+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
[X] SHOULD: If the source packag
[Bug 715180] Review Request: FreeMat - A free environment for rapid engineering, scientific prototyping and data processing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715180
--- Comment #20 from Richard Shaw 2011-08-19 09:52:59
EDT ---
Some observations I had while reviewing the spec file:
1. Should the -data sub-package be set as noarch?
2. I cleaned up the %cmake line for readability. Not a must, but... :)
%cmake -DFORCE_SYSTEM_LIBS=ON \
-DFFI_INCLUDE_DIR:PATH=%{_libdir}/libffi-3.0.9/include/ \
-DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=OFF \
-DUSE_VTK=ON \
./
Also, it's a good idea to put two blank lines between major sections (%prep,
%build, %install, etc.) I only put one blank line between similar sections
(%files, %files doc, %files devel, etc.)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542580] Review Request: statusnet - Open Source microblogging platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542580 Matěj Cepl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | Flag|needinfo?(rpan...@redhat.co | |m) | Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #15 from Matěj Cepl 2011-08-19 09:52:36 EDT --- Reopening this bug. I have now (more or less) working status.net package on http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/statusnet-1.0.0-*.src.rpm and http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/statusnet.spec and I will continue to work on it until it is ready for submission. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731519] Review Request: spacenavd - A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnecxion's input drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731519 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731525] Review Request: spnavcfg - Spacenav daemon interactive configuration program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731525 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731519] Review Request: spacenavd - A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnecxion's input drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731519 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(hobbes1069@gmail. ||com) --- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter 2011-08-19 10:07:22 EDT --- Initial review: naming: ok scriptlets: ok, though would be nice to investigate proper/native systemd init support licensing: ok sources: ok 0bb21da5315bd376aa508157a9455aaa spacenavd-0.5.tar.gz MUST: build doesn't use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS , please fix. Else, pretty small simple, fix the optflags thing, and looks like we have a winner. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-19 10:11:51 EDT --- pyppd-0.4.9-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyppd-0.4.9-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-19 10:14:14 EDT --- pyppd-0.4.9-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyppd-0.4.9-1.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-19 10:13:33 EDT --- pyppd-0.4.9-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyppd-0.4.9-1.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 731525] Review Request: spnavcfg - Spacenav daemon interactive configuration program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731525 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter 2011-08-19 10:15:24 EDT --- naming: ok sources: ok d20cf09515d1e39fd04877a00a2023b5 spnavcfg-0.2.1.tar.gz scriptlets: ok licensing: ok Not entirely happy with the setuid thing though, there's more robust and elegant solutions to that (like policykit), but meh. not a blocker, imo. rest is fairly simple. 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 729263] Review Request: rubygem-virt-p2v - Send a machine's storage and metadata to virt-p2v-server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729263 Richard W.M. Jones 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 729263] Review Request: rubygem-virt-p2v - Send a machine's storage and metadata to virt-p2v-server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729263 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-19 10:32:02 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 225622] Merge Review: boost
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225622 --- Comment #42 from Petr Machata 2011-08-19 10:33:14 EDT --- Hm, this bug fell off my radar. I made some amendments some time ago, but forgot to put myself on the CC list. Thanks for putting me back in loop. Matej is of course right, the points raised by others need to be addressed. -- 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 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765 --- Comment #76 from Mario Sanchez Prada 2011-08-19 10:40:43 EDT --- Here comes the 0.6.1 release: - The announcement (sent also to gnome-announce-list, still pending on moderation): http://mail.gnome.org/archives/frogr-list/2011-August/msg2.html - The tarballs: http://download.gnome.org/sources/frogr/0.6/frogr-0.6.1.tar.xz (2.08M) sha256sum: 06d9ec7447495bb3d1572f7ad39b6f25bd4f40d35c03f73ea4b62cbb204972e1 http://download.gnome.org/sources/frogr/0.6/frogr-0.6.1.tar.bz2 (2.16M) sha256sum: 2ef99647d07f2c5236cb5101a130712f312d33aad14cfc651aa198f8b67e0d2b Hope this time is for real! :-) 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 225622] Merge Review: boost
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225622 Petr Machata changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pmach...@redhat.com -- 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 731525] Review Request: spnavcfg - Spacenav daemon interactive configuration program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731525 --- Comment #3 from Richard Shaw 2011-08-19 10:57:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > Not entirely happy with the setuid thing though, there's more robust and > elegant solutions to that (like policykit), but meh. not a blocker, imo. Upstream is willing to make any simple changes that are not Fedora specific. Is there a simple solution to this problem? Thanks, Richard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731519] Review Request: spacenavd - A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnexion's input drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731519 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: spacenavd - |Review Request: spacenavd - |A free, compatible |A free, compatible |alternative for |alternative for |3Dconnecxion's input|3Dconnexion's input drivers |drivers | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731519] Review Request: spacenavd - A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnecxion's input drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731519 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(hobbes1069@gmail. | |com)| --- Comment #3 from Richard Shaw 2011-08-19 10:54:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > scriptlets: ok, though would be nice to investigate proper/native systemd init > support This was my first attempt at a daemon and didn't feel competent to do a systemd unit but if you want to help me I'm all for it. Here's my first attempt: [Unit] Description=Spacenav Daemon After=syslog.target [Service] Type=Simple ExecStart=/usr/bin/spacenavd [Install] WantedBy=graphical.target > MUST: build doesn't use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS , please fix. Fixed. Let me know if you want to move forward with a systemd unit or not then I'll post an updated spec and SRPM. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604971] Review Request: jwm - Joe's Window Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604971 --- Comment #16 from Germán Racca 2011-08-19 10:59:16 EDT --- OK, I'm going to work on this package this weekend and include the xterm as a requires. Thanks Mario :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731525] Review Request: spnavcfg - Spacenav daemon interactive configuration program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731525 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter 2011-08-19 11:03:36 EDT --- policykit is not fedora specific, but it's also a wee-bit non-trivial implementation-wise. would require a bit of work/coding (which, for better or worse, I lack the expertise/experience/skill at the moment myself). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731519] Review Request: spacenavd - A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnexion's input drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731519 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter 2011-08-19 11:06:38 EDT --- Hrm, systemd support can just as easily be developed outside of or after pkg review. (imo, better than way). I'll take your word that you've got the optflags thing nailed, (and will verify upon git import, and slap you with a wet noodle if they're still missing... :) ) 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 731851] Review Request: pygobject3 - Parallel installable python module for GObject Introspection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731851 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||michel+...@sylvestre.me AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|michel+...@sylvestre.me Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731851] Review Request: pygobject3 - Parallel installable python module for GObject Introspection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731851 --- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2011-08-19 11:20:01 EDT --- Reviewing using these scratch builds, for F-16: pygobject2: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3286561 pygobject3: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3286567 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725614] Review Request: libcryptui - Library for prompting for GPG keys
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725614 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-19 11:25:36 EDT --- libcryptui-3.1.4-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 457343] Review Request: jquery - Fast, concise library that simplifies how you use javascript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457343 --- Comment #8 from François Kooman 2011-08-19 11:25:41 EDT --- I would like to take over if I can figure out how to solve the Sizzle "problem" and some other issues I'm not a huge fan of requiring a modification to all software that depends on jquery.js to now all of a sudden also require an extra
[Bug 731683] Review Request: pyppd - PPD file compressor and generator for CUPS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731683 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-19 11:26:10 EDT --- pyppd-0.4.9-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731980] Review Request: openstack-novaclient - Client for OpenStack Nova API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731980 Chris Lalancette changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||clala...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|clala...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Chris Lalancette 2011-08-19 11:42:48 EDT --- I'll review this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728649] Review Request: airrac - C++ Simulated Revenue Accounting (RAC) System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728649 --- Comment #4 from Denis Arnaud 2011-08-19 12:20:06 EDT --- Many thanks for that review! (and sorry for the missing BRs) The new files are as following: --- Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/airrac/airrac-0.1.0-2.spec SRPM URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/airrac/airrac-0.1.0-2.fc15.src.rpm - -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558544] Review Request: gdisk - An fdisk-like partitioning tool for GPT disks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558544 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||or...@cora.nwra.com Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Orion Poplawski 2011-08-19 12:20:57 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: gdisk New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: orion InitialCC: Since Terje doesn't want to maintain in epel, I will. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 457343] Review Request: jquery - Fast, concise library that simplifies how you use javascript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457343 --- Comment #9 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi 2011-08-19 12:37:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > I would like to take over if I can figure out how to solve the Sizzle > "problem" Like I say, I'm not using jquery now so I don't know the extent of the sizzle problem. Does jquery actually require sizzle? Is it something that gets included into jquery when jquery is "built"? Need more information here > > 2) The static linking idea is interesting, but I guess we then might as well > just leave the "original" bundled jquery in the package to be sure it works as > the developers intended. > What "static linking" adds is the ability to track what libraries (and depending on the actual deps that we use, also their versions) are being used by an application. That way if foo was using jquery-1.0 and jquery-1.1 is released that fixes an issue (security, major bugfix, change to a more permissive license, etc) found in jquery-1.0 we'd know what software was using the old jquery and be able to rebuild them with the new version. > 3) Maybe somehow all versions can be made available in the package? > > - The jquery package can just contain the minified versions of all jquery > versions ever released (like what is available on the Google CDN)? It would probably be good to have both minified and "source" versions installed. GPL compliance would make this a requirement for some libraries... (possibly if it was the app was GPL although I'm very unclear on this.) > - Or maybe have two packages. The jquery package (containing only the latest > version) and a compat-jquery package (containing all? the previous versions)? > - Or implement a CDN api like Google for JS containing all jquery (and other > js > libs) versions? > Yeah -- I think we should have multiple packages. whether that's one for the current version and one for all older versions or one for each older version I'm not sure. And how to set those up internally I'm not sure. > 4) It would be interesting to pull jquery from git and build it locally (using > the Makefile). This pulls in Sizzle and Qunit from git. Possibly something can > be done there to unbundle? Furthermore it would require nodejs (not packaged > yet?) to minify jquery... > Hmm... If jquery is being shipped minified, we'd have to create that minified version from the source version no matter what. nodejs was under review but Lubomir seems to have disappeared: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634911 > 5) It seems to be impossible to test all software after upgrading jquery to a > newer version (see jquery 1.6.1 .attr() problem for instance). Should there be > test procedures? updates-testing is time enough for package maintainers/users > to check software against the latest version of jquery? How to avoid negative > karma if stuff breaks? :) > I don't see us being more strict than with other libraries from other languages. So, probably, be conservative in upgrading the library in older releases. Use updates-testing. Check software as best we can, etc, etc. > 6) How to fix all local copies of jquery in packages from being used? Use a > (Apache) rewrite rule that redirects all */jquery*.js calls to /js/jquery.js? > :-) Review and fix. Someone could check for files named jquery in the yum repository repodata to generate that list. This would be something to do after/if guidelines specifying how to package javascript libraries are 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 627362] Review Request: sx - extract and analyzes sos reports
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627362 Shane Bradley changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(pa...@hubbitus.in ||fo) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558544] Review Request: gdisk - An fdisk-like partitioning tool for GPT disks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558544 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-19 12:55:16 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 731851] Review Request: pygobject3 - Parallel installable python module for GObject Introspection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731851
Michel Alexandre Salim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(jo...@redhat.com)
--- Comment #3 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2011-08-19
13:04:22 EDT ---
Some changes are necessary; please see the unchecked boxes:
#+TODO: TODO(t) WAIT(w@/!) FAIL(f@) | DONE(d) N/A(n)
* TODO Review [70%]
- [X] Names [2/2]
- [X] Package name
- [X] Spec name
- [X] Package version [2/2]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning
- [X] Version number
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Version_Tag
- [X] Release tag
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Release_Tag
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages
- [X] Meets
[[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines][guidelines]]
- [X] Source files match upstream
$ sha1sum pygobject-2.90.2.tar.bz2
~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/pygobject-2.90.2.tar.bz2
ea56c46e2820578e18520d2ecd97547bbd8fc196 pygobject-2.90.2.tar.bz2
ea56c46e2820578e18520d2ecd97547bbd8fc196
/home/michel/rpmbuild/SOURCES/pygobject-2.90.2.tar.bz2
- [X] [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries][No
bundled libraries]]
- [-] License [2/4]
- [X] License is Fedora-approved
- [X] No licensing conflict
- [ ] License field accurate
some files are actually under MIT license; update field to say
LGPLv2+ and MIT
$ grep -rl "WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND" *
gi/pygi-property.c
gi/pygi-foreign-gvariant.h
gi/pygi-foreign-gvariant.c
gi/pygi-foreign.c
gi/pygi-signal-closure.h
gi/pygi-foreign.h
gi/pygi-property.h
gi/pygi-foreign-cairo.c
install-sh <-- irrelevant
- [ ] License included iff packaged by upstream
Please package COPYING file in pygobject3 and python3-gobject
- [-] rpmlint [1/2]
- [X] on src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
- [ ] on x86_64.rpm
pygobject3.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.28.6-1
['2.90.2-1.fc16', '2.90.2-1']
\=> version number needs updating
pygobject3.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/gi/_gi_cairo.so _gi_cairo.so()(64bit)
pygobject3.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/gi/_glib/_glib.so _glib.so()(64bit)
pygobject3.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/gi/_gi.so _gi.so()(64bit)
pygobject3.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/gi/_gobject/_gobject.so _gobject.so()(64bit)
\=> normal for Python modules
pygobject3.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin
/usr/lib64/libpyglib-gi-2.0-python.so.0.0.0
pygobject3.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postun
/usr/lib64/libpyglib-gi-2.0-python.so.0.0.0
\=> ldconfig needs to be added
pygobject3.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/libpyglib-gi-2.0-python.so
\=> can this be moved to -devel?
pygobject3.x86_64: W: doc-file-dependency
/usr/share/doc/pygobject3-2.90.2/examples/cairo-demo.py /usr/bin/env
\=> harmless
pygobject3-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) embeding ->
embedding, bedimming, bedding
\=> please correct spelling (wow, aspell actually works this time)
pygobject3-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
\=> harmless
pygobject3-doc.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/pygobject/xsl/fixxref.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
\=> is this even needed? might want to exclude it
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 9 warnings.
- [X] Language & locale [2/2]
- [X] Spec in US English
- [X] Spec legible
field values could probably be better aligned, but that's a nitpick
- [X] Build [2/2]
- [X] BRs complete
- [X] Directory ownership
- [-] Spec inspection [7/10]
- [ ] ldconfig for libraries
Missing; see rpmlint comment
- [X] No duplicate files
- [X] File permissions
- [X] Filenames must be UTF-8
- [X] no BuildRoot
([[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag][except if
targeting RHEL5]])
OPTIONAL: buildroot could be removed
- [X] [RHEL 5] %buildroot cleaned on %install
OPTIONAL: rm -rf no longer necessary
- [ ] Macro usage consistent
Question: why is %{_smp_mflags} not used for building
python3-gobject?
- [X] Documentation [2/2]
-
[Bug 731851] Review Request: pygobject3 - Parallel installable python module for GObject Introspection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731851
--- Comment #4 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2011-08-19
13:18:07 EDT ---
Problems experienced when attempting to install pygobject3:
- the -codegen subpackage is still defined, and marked as a dependency of the
-devel subpackage, but it is no longer generated (and has no %files codegen
section).
This should probably be excised; right now the -devel subpackage is not
installable
- pygobject3-doc and pygobject2-doc are not parallel-installable; either make
them install files into versioned directories (e.g.
%{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/pygobject{2,3}/) or make them conflict with each
other. The former is probably better
== Usage testing ==
gnome-tweak-tool now works again! Will update the dependency once this review
is 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 634911] Review Request: nodejs - Evented I/O for v8 JavaScript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634911 François Kooman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||457343 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 457343] Review Request: jquery - Fast, concise library that simplifies how you use javascript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457343 François Kooman changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||634911 --- Comment #10 from François Kooman 2011-08-19 13:22:54 EDT --- > Like I say, I'm not using jquery now so I don't know the extent of the sizzle > problem. Does jquery actually require sizzle? Is it something that gets > included into jquery when jquery is "built"? Need more information here Yeah, it gets included during "build". It can be extracted (i.e.: not included during building with some Makefile modifications), but I guess you need to then include "js/sizzle.js" before including "js/jquery.js" in your application. Would that be an acceptable requirement for packagers? > What "static linking" adds is the ability to track what libraries (and > depending on the actual deps that we use, also their versions) are being used > by an application. That way if foo was using jquery-1.0 and jquery-1.1 is > released that fixes an issue (security, major bugfix, change to a more > permissive license, etc) found in jquery-1.0 we'd know what software was using > the old jquery and be able to rebuild them with the new version. Above you suggested to copy the jquery.js in the package itself. Would requiring a specific version of jquery (the one currently available in the distro you are packaging for) already be enough? So in the spec you can say: Requires: jquery = 1.6.2 That will take care of screaming when the jquery package gets updated and force the application packager to take action... Annoying if there is a new version every month... > It would probably be good to have both minified and "source" versions > installed. GPL compliance would make this a requirement for some libraries... > (possibly if it was the app was GPL although I'm very unclear on this.) Yep, that was the intention anyway... > Yeah -- I think we should have multiple packages. whether that's one for the > current version and one for all older versions or one for each older version > I'm not sure. And how to set those up internally I'm not sure. That is a big issue, not sure a correct answer exists. I saw Debian ships quite a few js libs, including jquery named libjs-jquery. It seems they just have one version and keep that for the life of the distro... That would also be an option, only upgrade the package in rawhide and never upgrade the released distro after it is released. I'm not sure in the case of jquery there are any security updates to old versions of jquery anyway... > Hmm... If jquery is being shipped minified, we'd have to create that minified > version from the source version no matter what. It ships both minified and unminified. But I guess if we want to provide the minified version as well we need to "translate" it ourselves. > nodejs was under review but Lubomir seems to have disappeared: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634911 Added this bug to depend on 634911. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731980] Review Request: openstack-novaclient - Client for OpenStack Nova API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731980
--- Comment #2 from Chris Lalancette 2011-08-19 13:18:44
EDT ---
Mark, from a high-level perspective, why have the 2 subpackages
(openstack-novaclient and python-novaclient)? Since the main package only
contains a single executable that is python anyway, what about mashing the two
together into just python-novaclient? This has the added benefit of matching
the upstream tarball.
rpmlint output:
[clalance@localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint
/home/clalance/rpmbuild/SRPMS/openstack-novaclient-2.6.1-0.2.83bzr.fc14.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[clalance@localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint
/home/clalance/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/openstack-novaclient-2.6.1-0.2.83bzr.fc14.noarch.rpm
openstack-novaclient.noarch: W: no-documentation
openstack-novaclient.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nova
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[clalance@localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint
/home/clalance/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python-novaclient-2.6.1-0.2.83bzr.fc14.noarch.rpm
python-novaclient.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
[clalance@localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint
/home/clalance/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/openstack-novaclient-doc-2.6.1-0.2.83bzr.fc14.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
The error in python is a false-positive, and the two warnings are unfortunate
but not showstoppers.
===
In the description, there is a bit of a fragment:
This package contains command-line script.
Maybe should be:
This package contains the command-line script.
(but that is minor)
===
Checklist
[ OK ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package
[ OK ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines
[ OK ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [...]
[ OK ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
and meet the Licensing Guidelines
[ OK ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the
actual license
[ OK ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of
the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc - clalance:
while the LICENSE file is in the git checkout, it does not make it into the
upstream tarball, so this is OK.
[ OK ] MUST: Packages must not contain pre-built binaries or libraries
[ OK ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[ OK ] MUST: The spec file for the package must be legible.
[ OK ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for
this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package,
please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
[ OK ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary
rpms on at least one primary architecture
[ N/A ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on
an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the
spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST
have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package
does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST
be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line
[ OK ] MUST: Packages must not have a BuildRoot tag as of Fedora-10
[ ?? ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging
Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply
common sense. - clalance: Mark, is python-devel really a
BuildRequires? A quick look through the source seems to indicate that it is
pure python, but maybe I am missing something.
[ OK ] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but
is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or
quantity).
[ OK ] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the
program must run properly if it is not present.
[ N/A ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by
using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
forbidden
[ N/A ] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores sh
[Bug 728649] Review Request: airrac - C++ Simulated Revenue Accounting (RAC) System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728649 Martin Gieseking changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Martin Gieseking 2011-08-19 13:31:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > Many thanks for that review! You're welcome. The package looks good now. However, while it builds successfully for F15, it fails for F16: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3286699 The problem seems to be related to a newer version of the Boost libraries. You probably have to rebuild stdair. Package 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 702103] Review Request: python-osmgpsmap - Python bindings for osm-gps-map GTK+ widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702103 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||725453 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731519] Review Request: spacenavd - A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnexion's input drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731519 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Richard Shaw 2011-08-19 13:40:18 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: spacenavd Short Description: A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnexion's input drivers Owners: hobbes1069 Branches: f15 f16 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 731525] Review Request: spnavcfg - Spacenav daemon interactive configuration program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731525 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Richard Shaw 2011-08-19 13:42:10 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: spnavcfg Short Description: Spacenav daemon interactive configuration program Owners: hobbes1069 Branches: f15 f16 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 731519] Review Request: spacenavd - A free, compatible alternative for 3Dconnexion's input drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731519 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-19 13:46:20 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 731525] Review Request: spnavcfg - Spacenav daemon interactive configuration program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731525 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-19 13:46:43 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 728649] Review Request: airrac - C++ Simulated Revenue Accounting (RAC) System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728649 --- Comment #6 from Denis Arnaud 2011-08-19 13:48:31 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > The problem seems to be related to a newer version of the Boost libraries. You > probably have to rebuild stdair. Absolutely. Due to the freeze for F16 Alpha, package rebuilds did not find their way to the updates repository: they are still waiting on updates-testing: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/stdair-0.36.2-2.fc16 . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728649] Review Request: airrac - C++ Simulated Revenue Accounting (RAC) System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728649 Denis Arnaud 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 731966] Review Request: openstack-glance - OpenStack Image Service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731966 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||steve.tray...@cern.ch --- Comment #1 from Steve Traylen 2011-08-19 13:58:58 EDT --- Hi, Very happy to review this, the obvious thing that needs some work before this can really commence is the adaption to systemd. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Systemd Steve. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728649] Review Request: airrac - C++ Simulated Revenue Accounting (RAC) System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728649 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-19 14:22:46 EDT --- Please include a SCM request when setting the accompannying flag. 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 702103] Review Request: python-osmgpsmap - Python bindings for osm-gps-map GTK+ widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702103 --- Comment #12 from Volker Fröhlich 2011-08-19 14:48:10 EDT --- So, did you find out about the license question? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731898] Review Request: opendkim - DKIM library and milter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731898 Steve Jenkins changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://packages.stevejenkin ||s.com/opendkim/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731851] Review Request: pygobject3 - Parallel installable python module for GObject Introspection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731851 John (J5) Palmieri changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(jo...@redhat.com) | --- Comment #5 from John (J5) Palmieri 2011-08-19 15:38:56 EDT --- Fixed all errors except the .so version warning as this should be fixed upstream. There is no reason to link directly to it anymore and I don't want to create a -devel package for python3-gobject just for this. As for the warnings they can be waved. Docs were removed because they are a holdover from the static bindings and are being reworked upstream. new spec --> http://johnp.fedorapeople.org/downloads/pygobject3/pygobject3.spec new srpm --> http://johnp.fedorapeople.org/downloads/pygobject3/pygobject3-2.90.2-2.fc15.src.rpm I tried scratch building for f16-candidate but there is a dep on a newer version of python3-pycairo. How did you build it? Rawhide build --> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3287559 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716475] Review Request: game-music-emu - Video game music file emulation/playback library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716475 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-19 16:12:51 EDT --- game-music-emu-0.5.5-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
