[Bug 708554] Review Request: umph - Command line tool for parsing video links from Youtube feeds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708554 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:32:20 EDT --- umph-0.1.8-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725909] Review Request: php53-mapi - The PHP MAPI extension by Zarafa
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725909 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:31:52 EDT --- zarafa-7.0.1-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573929] Review Request: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib - Low-Level Interface to zlib compression 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=573929 --- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:32:54 EDT --- perl-threads-shared-1.37-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708554] Review Request: umph - Command line tool for parsing video links from Youtube feeds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708554 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|umph-0.1.8-2.fc15 |umph-0.1.8-2.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 730638] Review Request: perl-Business-CreditCard - Validate/generate credit card check-sums/names
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730638 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version|perl-Business-CreditCard-0. |perl-Business-CreditCard-0. |31-1.fc17 |31-1.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-08-28 01:28:55 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725909] Review Request: php53-mapi - The PHP MAPI extension by Zarafa
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725909 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php53-mapi-7.0.0-1.el5 |zarafa-7.0.1-1.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 608319] Review Request: memaker - An avatar creator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608319 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:34:49 EDT --- memaker-20100110-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730033] Review Request: perl-autobox-dump - Human/perl readable strings from the results of an EXPR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730033 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-autobox-dump-20090426. |perl-autobox-dump-20090426. |1746-1.fc15 |1746-1.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 702957] Review Request: pclock - WindowMaker dockapp which displays an analog clock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702957 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:36:10 EDT --- pclock-0.13.1-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608319] Review Request: memaker - An avatar creator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608319 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||memaker-20100110-1.fc16 Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702957] Review Request: pclock - WindowMaker dockapp which displays an analog clock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702957 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|pclock-0.13.1-3.fc15|pclock-0.13.1-3.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 730033] Review Request: perl-autobox-dump - Human/perl readable strings from the results of an EXPR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730033 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:34:18 EDT --- perl-autobox-dump-20090426.1746-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719456] Review Request: edg-gridftp-client - Command line clients to GridFTP libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719456 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:39:45 EDT --- edg-gridftp-client-1.2.9.2-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730034] Review Request: perl-autobox-List-Util - Bring the List::Util functions to autobox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730034 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:41:51 EDT --- perl-autobox-List-Util-20090629-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573929] Review Request: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib - Low-Level Interface to zlib compression 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=573929 --- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:40:45 EDT --- perl-Test-Simple-0.98-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730034] Review Request: perl-autobox-List-Util - Bring the List::Util functions to autobox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730034 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-autobox-List-Util-2009 |perl-autobox-List-Util-2009 |0629-1.fc14 |0629-1.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 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #87 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:41:45 EDT --- frogr-0.6.1-1.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 719456] Review Request: edg-gridftp-client - Command line clients to GridFTP libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719456 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||edg-gridftp-client-1.2.9.2- ||2.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-08-28 01:39:50 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573929] Review Request: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib - Low-Level Interface to zlib compression 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=573929 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:45:06 EDT --- perl-parent-0.225-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573929] Review Request: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib - Low-Level Interface to zlib compression 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=573929 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:47:55 EDT --- perl-version-0.88-6.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 709180] Review Request: jackctlmmc - control JACK transport via MIDI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709180 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:44:53 EDT --- jackctlmmc-4-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 726962] Review Request: wmweather - Applet which shows local weather conditions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726962 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:44:16 EDT --- wmweather-2.4.5-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730037] Review Request: perl-autovivification - Lexically disable autovivification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730037 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:46:24 EDT --- perl-autovivification-0.09-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 726962] Review Request: wmweather - Applet which shows local weather conditions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726962 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|wmweather-2.4.5-2.fc15 |wmweather-2.4.5-2.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 709180] Review Request: jackctlmmc - control JACK transport via MIDI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709180 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|jackctlmmc-4-3.fc14 |jackctlmmc-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 573929] Review Request: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib - Low-Level Interface to zlib compression 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=573929 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-28 01:47:46 EDT --- perl-CPAN-Meta-YAML-0.003-7.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 708711] Review Request: nomnom - The graphical video download tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708711 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|volke...@gmx.at Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 733603] Review Request: sugar-ruler - Ruler is a simple collection of measurement tools that are displayed on the screen.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733603
Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ni...@autoverse.net
--- Comment #6 from Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net 2011-08-28 05:12:00 EDT
---
Two quick comments:
- It's better to use macros. For instance:
%{__python} setup.py build
- You should start updating the %changelog section every time you make changes
and post the new spec SRPM here so that reviewers and commenters can keep
track of the changes you've made. (You also need to bump the Release number
every time you do so.)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693135] Review Request: ufl-python - A Python implementation of Universal Foundation Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693135
Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pin...@pingoured.fr,
||sebastien.willm...@gmail.co
||m
--- Comment #1 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com
2011-08-28 05:15:19 EDT ---
This is an informal review
[X] rpmlint must be run on every package.
rpmlint ufl-python-0.1-0.1.pre.fc15.noarch.rpm
ufl-python-0.1-0.1.pre.fc15.src.rpm
ufl-python.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
ufl-python.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Ok: the README file is empty
[X] The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[X] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[X] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[X] The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
The license is GPLv3
[X] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[NA] 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.
[X] The spec file must be written in American English.
[X] The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[X] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
Upstream md5sum: 80d5c06a88a854898d4083ad06ffb4d3
Package md5sum: 80d5c06a88a854898d4083ad06ffb4d3
[X] The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Build successful on Fedora 15 x86_64
[NA] If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[X] 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.
[NA] The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[NA] Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files(not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[X] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[NA] If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[X] 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.
[X] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
[X] Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[X] Each package must consistently use macros.
[X] The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[NA] Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[NA] 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.
[NA] Header files must be in a -devel package.
[NA] Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA] 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.
[NA] In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}.
[X] Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
[NA] Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,
and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
[X] Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[X] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
I didn't find any problem in the package.
--
Configure bugmail:
[Bug 694994] Review Request: yoshimi - Rewrite of ZynAddSubFx aiming for better JACK support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694994 --- Comment #16 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 05:36:09 EDT --- Created attachment 520210 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=520210 Patch to fix link error with fltk-1.3 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 694994] Review Request: yoshimi - Rewrite of ZynAddSubFx aiming for better JACK support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694994 --- Comment #15 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 05:35:04 EDT --- Hi Adam, I was rebuilding this for rawhide and found that it failed with fltk-1.3. I'll attach a patch for this. Also, there is talk of a merge back with zyn given Cal's passing - not sure if you are aware of this. If not you might want to check with both project's developer lists for an update. Let me know if/when you want me to proceed with the review as its pretty much there. Brendan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728329] Review Request: perl-Test-Version - Check to see that versions in modules are sane
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728329 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728329] Review Request: perl-Test-Version - Check to see that versions in modules are sane
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728329 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|iarn...@gmail.com Bug 728329 depends on bug 728972, which changed state. Bug 728972 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Vars - Detects unused variables https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728972 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|ERRATA |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728329] Review Request: perl-Test-Version - Check to see that versions in modules are sane
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728329 --- Comment #4 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 06:21:17 EDT --- Koji (success) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3307347 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728329] Review Request: perl-Test-Version - Check to see that versions in modules are sane
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728329 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |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 728329] Review Request: perl-Test-Version - Check to see that versions in modules are sane
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728329 --- Comment #5 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 06:35:47 EDT --- Nicely documented as usual. If I was being picky, I'd point out the missing author/release test dependency on Test::Pod::LinkCheck and that it still needs to be packaged for Fedora. But no real problems, so APPROVED. koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3307347 Spec looks sane, clean and consistent; license is correct (Artistic 2.0); make test passes cleanly. Source tarballs match upstream (sha1sum): baa9526af3710718b93e051942eca85fa70af6a8 Test-Version-1.0.0.tar.gz baa9526af3710718b93e051942eca85fa70af6a8 Test-Version-1.0.0.tar.gz.srpm Final provides / requires are sane: == perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc17.noarch.rpm == rpmlint 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. provides perl(Test::Version) = 1.0.0 perl-Test-Version = 1.0.0-3.fc17 requires perl = 0:5.006 perl(File::Find::Rule::Perl) perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.14.1) perl(Module::Extract::VERSION) perl(parent) perl(strict) perl(Test::Builder) perl(Test::More) perl(version) = 0.86 perl(warnings) obsoletes conflicts == perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc17.src.rpm == rpmlint 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. provides requires aspell-en perl(Carp) perl(English) perl(Exporter) perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) perl(File::Find) perl(File::Find::Rule::Perl) perl(File::Temp) perl(Module::Extract::VERSION) perl(parent) perl(Pod::Coverage::TrustPod) perl(Pod::Wordlist::hanekomu) perl(Scalar::Util) perl(Test::Builder) perl(Test::CPAN::Changes) perl(Test::CPAN::Meta) perl(Test::CPAN::Meta::JSON) perl(Test::DistManifest) perl(Test::EOL) perl(Test::Kwalitee) perl(Test::MinimumVersion) perl(Test::Mojibake) perl(Test::More) perl(Test::Perl::Critic) perl(Test::Pod) = 1.41 perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) = 1.08 perl(Test::Portability::Files) perl(Test::Spelling) = 0.12 perl(Test::Synopsis) perl(Test::Tester) perl(Test::Vars) perl(version) = 0.86 obsoletes conflicts mock install INFO: mock.py version 1.1.12 starting... State Changed: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled State Changed: start Mock Version: 1.1.12 INFO: Mock Version: 1.1.12 State Changed: lock buildroot INFO: installing package(s): perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc17.noarch.rpm INFO: Ignored option -c (probably due to merging -yc != -y -c) Package Arch Version Repository Size Installing: perl-Test-Version noarch 1.0.0-3.fc17 /perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc17.noarch 20 k Installing for dependencies: perl-CPAN noarch 1.9600-185.fc17 fedora 259 k perl-CPAN-Meta-YAML noarch 0.003-185.fc17fedora 33 k perl-Digest-SHA x86_64 1:5.61-185.fc17 fedora 67 k perl-ExtUtils-MakeMaker noarch 6.57.5-185.fc17 fedora 303 k perl-ExtUtils-ParseXS noarch 1:2.2210-185.fc17 fedora 52 k perl-File-Find-Rule noarch 0.32-6.fc16 fedora 33 k perl-File-Find-Rule-Perlnoarch 1.10-3.fc16 fedora 19 k perl-HTTP-Tiny noarch 0.012-185.fc17fedora 40 k perl-JSON-PPnoarch 2.27200-2.fc16fedora 54 k perl-Module-Extract-VERSION noarch 1.01-3.fc17 fedora 8.4 k perl-Number-Compare noarch 0.01-16.fc16 fedora 9.4 k perl-Params-Utilx86_64 1.04-2.fc16 fedora 35 k perl-Parse-CPAN-Metanoarch 1:1.4401-185.fc17 fedora 32 k perl-Test-Harness noarch 3.23-185.fc17 fedora 287 k perl-Test-Simplenoarch 0.98-185.fc17 fedora 118 k perl-Text-Glob noarch 0.09-2.fc16 fedora 11 k perl-devel x86_64 4:5.14.1-185.fc17 fedora 450 k perl-parent noarch 1:0.225-185.fc17 fedora 30 k perl-versionnoarch 3:0.88-185.fc17 fedora 55 k python x86_64 2.7.2-8.fc17 fedora 73 k systemtap-sdt-devel x86_64 1.6-1.fc16fedora 46 k Transaction Summary Install 22 Package(s) Total size: 2.0 M Total download size: 28 k Installed size: 4.6 M Installed: perl-Test-Version.noarch 0:1.0.0-3.fc17
[Bug 560787] Review Request: python-mtTkinter - A thread-safe version of Tkinter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560787 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||karlthe...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|karlthe...@gmail.com 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 560787] Review Request: python-mtTkinter - A thread-safe version of Tkinter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560787
--- Comment #16 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 07:34:31
EDT ---
My review took into consideration previous comments from Jason and Spot.
Licensing issues should have been cleared, and though not actively maintained
(it has no need to be), upstream maintainer still answers.
Package Review: python-mtTkinter (noarch)
=
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [1]
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Requires correct
[-] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [2]
[x] Package run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) and the beginning of
%install.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[x] Changelog in prescribed format.
[!] Rpmlint output is silent.
$ rpmlint -iv python-mtTkinter-0.4-2.fc15.src.rpm
python-mtTkinter.src: I: checking
python-mtTkinter.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multithreaded -
multicolored
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-mtTkinter.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tkinter -
interlink, inter
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-mtTkinter.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US NET's - Net's,
NE's, PET's
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-mtTkinter.src: I: checking-url
http://tkinter.unpythonic.net/wiki/mtTkinter (timeout 10 seconds)
python-mtTkinter.src: I: checking-url
http://tkinter.unpythonic.net/attach/mtTkinter/attachments/mtTkinter-0.4.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
python-mtTkinter.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://tkinter.unpythonic.net/attach/mtTkinter/attachments/mtTkinter-0.4.tar.gz
HTTP Error 404: Not Found
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
$ rpmlint -iv
/home/haikel/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python-mtTkinter-0.4-2.fc15.noarch.rpm
python-mtTkinter.noarch: I: checking
python-mtTkinter.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multithreaded
- multicolored
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-mtTkinter.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US NET's -
Net's, NE's, PET's
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-mtTkinter.noarch: I: checking-url
http://tkinter.unpythonic.net/wiki/mtTkinter (timeout 10 seconds)
python-mtTkinter.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/mtTkinter.py
This text file has executable bits set or is located in a path dedicated for
executables, but lacks a shebang and cannot thus be executed. If the file is
meant to be an executable script, add the shebang, otherwise remove the
executable bits or move the file elsewhere.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
=== you should not install mtTkinter.py with executable bits set
Some python modules provide a __main__ entry point for testing purpose (for
instance, httplib.py from stdlib) but they should not be installed with a 0755
mask.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
LGPLv3+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[-] License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[3,4]
[x] Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
sha1sum provided sources: 87be4bc80ac0bfa77ea07a91ff65c3ec9e6b94a2
sha1sum upstream sources: 461bfe1d3e9cf5df12fb6edad3c332397b6d101a
Though diff had shown me no difference, please use upstream sources
(they're definitively not the same, since upstream sources properly uncompress
inside a subdirectory)
[-] Compiler flags are appropriate.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in
[Bug 732215] Review Request: mined - Powerful Text Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732215
Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sebastien.willm...@gmail.co
||m
--- Comment #2 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com
2011-08-28 08:21:50 EDT ---
This is an informal review
[!] rpmlint must be run on every package.
rpmlint mined-2011.17-1.fc15.src.rpm mined-2011.17-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm
mined-debuginfo-2011.17-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm
mined.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
mined.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/share/doc/mined-2011.17/LICENSE.GNU usrshare/package_doc/LICENSE.GNU
mined.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/share/doc/mined-2011.17/CHANGES usrshare/package_doc/CHANGES
mined.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/share/doc/mined-2011.17/VERSION usrshare/package_doc/VERSION
mined.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/uterm.1.gz 96:
warning: macro `..' not defined
mined.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/mined.1.gz 351:
warning: macro `VL' not defined
mined.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/man1/mined.1.gz
mined.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/share/doc/mined-2011.17/README usrshare/package_doc/README
mined-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings.
[X] The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[X] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[!] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
Fix rpmlint, license and directory ownership issues.
[!] The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
The license is GPLv2+, but there is the following sentence in the README
file:
Also redistributions should not take license/royalty fees for the use
of mined or any derived version (it is not very clear to the software
community what exactly the GNU license means in this respect).
I think this is not acceptable for Fedora (and for the GPL).
[X] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[X] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for
the package must be included in %doc.
[X] The spec file must be written in American English.
[X] The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[X] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
Upstream: b38eb3c0bf77b76c24ae360f997fca1a
Package: b38eb3c0bf77b76c24ae360f997fca1a
[X] The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Build successful on Fedora 15 x86_64
[NA] If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[X] 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.
[NA] The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[NA] Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files(not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[X] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[NA] If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[!] 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.
% LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/share/mined
file /usr/share/mined is not owned by any package
[X] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
[X] Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[X] Each package must consistently use macros.
[X] The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[NA] Large documentation files must go in a -doc
[Bug 727030] Review Request: ufw - uncomplicated firewall
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727030 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||karlthe...@gmail.com --- Comment #15 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 08:33:04 EDT --- according to ufw documentation, you need to provide your own initscripts, these are only helpers. Forget about SysV initscripts, and provide a systemd service instead (i attached a working albeit basic one) * drop the BR: iptables-devel, you don't need it * using %find_lang is a must, they should be installed in location accordingly to GNU standards. You may have to check this with upstream http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Directory-Variables.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 733603] Review Request: sugar-ruler - Ruler is a simple collection of measurement tools that are displayed on the screen.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733603
--- Comment #7 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com 2011-08-28
11:07:52 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Two quick comments:
- It's better to use macros. For instance:
%{__python} setup.py build
- You should start updating the %changelog section every time you make changes
and post the new spec SRPM here so that reviewers and commenters can keep
track of the changes you've made. (You also need to bump the Release number
every time you do so.)
Thanks for reminding about the %changelog.
Here are the new files,
Spec URL: http://callkalpa.fedorapeople.org/sugar-ruler/sugar-ruler.spec
SRPM URL:
http://callkalpa.fedorapeople.org/sugar-ruler/sugar-ruler-11-4.fc15.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 673790] Rename Request: mingw32-w32api - mingw-headers - Win32/Win64 header files and stubs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673790 --- Comment #6 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl 2011-08-28 11:44:46 EDT --- spot, do you happen to know if RH Legal is currently investigating the approval for inclusion of the mingw-w64 toolchain in Fedora and what the current state of it is? We're already waiting several months for legal clearance, but we don't see any progress here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 589471] Review Request: perl-Test-POE-Server-TCP - POE Component providing TCP server services for test cases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=589471 Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #5 from Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com 2011-08-28 11:48:34 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Test-POE-Server-TCP New Branches: el6 Owners: remi -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 733925] New: Review Request: libdatrie - double-array trie implementation library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libdatrie - double-array trie implementation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733925 Summary: Review Request: libdatrie - double-array trie implementation library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: auri...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/3/3f/Libdatrie.spec SRPM URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/5/5e/Libdatrie-0.2.4-1.src.rpm Description: A library, implementing double-array trie data structure. You can find the detailed description in upstream home page: http://linux.thai.net/~thep/datrie/datrie.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 733925] Review Request: libdatrie - double-array trie implementation 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=733925 Aurimas Černius auri...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) --- Comment #1 from Aurimas Černius auri...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 12:41:51 EDT --- Added FE-NEEDSPONSOR to blocks, since it's my first 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 720435] Review Request: epson-inkjet-printer-escpr - Drivers for Epson inkjet printers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720435 Thomas Sailer t.sai...@alumni.ethz.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720435] Review Request: epson-inkjet-printer-escpr - Drivers for Epson inkjet printers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720435 --- Comment #7 from Thomas Sailer t.sai...@alumni.ethz.ch 2011-08-28 13:30:09 EDT --- Could you add a comment to the spec file documenting how you contacted upstream? i.e. bugtracking system URL, email message id, etc. APPROVED by sailer -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720435] Review Request: epson-inkjet-printer-escpr - Drivers for Epson inkjet printers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720435 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2011-08-28 13:42:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) Could you add a comment to the spec file documenting how you contacted upstream? i.e. bugtracking system URL, email message id, etc. Well, the contact was purely about cosmetic stuff, and doesn't affect anything in the specfile, so I don't think it is necessary to make any changes. If I were to patch the source (which doesn't really serve any purpose, since the fsf address is just in the comments), then a reference would of course be necessary. Also, since I did the contact through the contact page on their website, I wouldn't have any reference in the first place. Thanks for the review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: epson-inkjet-printer-escpr Short Description: Drivers for Epson inkjet printers Owners: jussilehtola Branches: F-14 F-15 F-16 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 730043] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch - Convert DateTimes to/from epoch seconds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730043
Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mari...@freenet.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mari...@freenet.de
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-08-28 14:34:54
EDT ---
New Koji scratch build (for yours no files available anymore):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3307303
$ rpmlint -i -v *
perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch.noarch: I: checking
perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch.noarch: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/DateTime-Format-Epoch/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch-0.13/LICENSE
The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or
misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file,
possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF.
perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch.src: I: checking
perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/DateTime-Format-Epoch/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/DateTime/DateTime-Format-Epoch-0.13.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
Just an old FSF address, no further issues. You might drop the LICENSE from
files, because the package is licensed under the common Perl terms anyway.
-
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.
GPL+ or Artistic
[+] 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 *
f42982ea634401df953f88ce5eec1b7d DateTime-Format-Epoch-0.13.tar.gz
f42982ea634401df953f88ce5eec1b7d
DateTime-Format-Epoch-0.13.tar.gz.packaged
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
- Succesful Koji build available.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] 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: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] 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), ...
[.] 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: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
[Bug 733053] Review Request: perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8 - Checks if scalar is valid UTF-8
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733053
Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mari...@freenet.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mari...@freenet.de
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-08-28 15:03:47
EDT ---
Koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3307770
$ rpmlint -i -v *
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.i686: I: checking
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.i686: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Unicode-String/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.src: I: checking
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Unicode-String/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.src: E: unknown-key GPG#b56a8bac
The package was signed, but with an unknown key. See the rpm --import option
for more information.
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/B/BR/BRADFITZ/Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.x86_64: I: checking
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.x86_64: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Unicode-String/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-debuginfo.i686: I: checking
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Unicode-String/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Unicode-String/ (timeout 10 seconds)
/home/mariobl/Arbeitsfläche/perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8/perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03-2.fc17.src/perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.spec:
I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/B/BR/BRADFITZ/Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
The srpm has been signed, probably unintended... No further issues.
-
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.
UCD, GPL+ or Artistic
[+] 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 *86e8e76883e4ef96820f893aab6ccdca perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8.spec
a483f665b2bc62d7737c209294e64e1e Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03.tar.gz
a483f665b2bc62d7737c209294e64e1e Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03.tar.gz.packaged
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
- Succesful Koji build available.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] 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: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] 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), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST:
[Bug 670915] Review Request: aprsg - Amateur Radio APRS Gateway
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670915 Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mari...@freenet.de Bug 670915 depends on bug 669010, which changed state. Bug 669010 Summary: Review Request: libfap - C port of Ham::APRS::FAP APRS Parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669010 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-08-28 15:46:50 EDT --- Some first issues: Assuming you want to provide for no older releases than EPEL6 (according to libfap), you may drop the BuildRoot definition, the %clean section, rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT from %install and %defattr from %files. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#EL6. For EPEL 6. there are currently no differences to the common Fedora packaging guidelines. Please remove the gz extension from the manpage in %files and let the build system choose the compression format. Well, it is gz now anyway, but could be changed in the future. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3307866 The build fails for Rawhide. See the build.log: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3307867name=build.log aprspacket.cpp: In constructor 'AprsPacket::AprsPacket(const string, const string, const std::vectorstd::basic_stringchar , const string, const bool)': aprspacket.cpp:131:55: error: too few arguments to function 'void fap_explain_error(fap_error_code_t, char*)' /usr/include/fap.h:381:6: note: declared here aprspacket.cpp: In copy constructor 'AprsPacket::AprsPacket(const AprsPacket, const std::vectorstd::basic_stringchar )': aprspacket.cpp:184:57: error: too few arguments to function 'void fap_explain_error(fap_error_code_t, char*)' /usr/include/fap.h:381:6: note: declared here aprspacket.cpp: In constructor 'AprsPacket::AprsPacket(fap_packet_t*, const bool)': aprspacket.cpp:506:54: error: too few arguments to function 'void fap_explain_error(fap_error_code_t, char*)' /usr/include/fap.h:381:6: note: declared here Don't know how to interpret this. The libfap-devel dependency is present in Rawhide (v.1.1.1). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #24 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-08-28 16:08:41 EDT --- The current Makefile in src/ (created by configure script) says: LDFLAGS = -lX11 -lpng12 -ljpeg -lXft -lXrender -lX11 -lfribidi -lXpm -lXext -lXmu -lXinerama We have to add -lfreetype in some way. Normally, this should be possible with a configure option, but --with-freetype doesn't work. Don't know what to do in this case. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725885] Review Request: phpMyAdmin3 - Handle the administration of MySQL over the World Wide Web
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725885 Bug 725885 depends on bug 725906, which changed state. Bug 725906 Summary: Review Request: php53-extras - Additional PHP modules from the standard PHP distribution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725906 What|Old Value |New Value Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA --- Comment #6 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de 2011-08-28 16:16:44 EDT --- I'm fine with the showduplicates output of yum. The installation examples from comment #4 and #5 are as expected from my point of view. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #25 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-08-28 16:21:26 EDT --- Ah, just seen: The src/Makefile also says: -I/usr/include/freetype2 That is, the Linker is looking for the wrong package. Perhaps changes could be applied by a sed command after configure is finished...? Don't know if it is usual to apply a patch after the configure run. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 --- Comment #16 from Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com 2011-08-28 22:51:31 EDT --- Formal review: * rpmlint appended at bottom * naming: OK * spec file name matches: OK * Packaging Guidelines: OK * Licensed: OK (ASL 2.0) * License tag: OK * License included: OK * Spec in English: OK * Source matches: OK (manually downloaded) * Builds on at least one arch: OK (built for noarch on on x86_64) * ExcludeArch: unneeded, as it's noarch: OK * BRs ok: Built in Koji. OK. Failed to build in koji against dist-rawhide due to sphinx segfault. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3307949name=build.log Successfully built in koji against dist-f14 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3307950 * spec locales: N/A. OK. * ldconfig: N/A. OK. * no system libs: OK * relocateable: N/A. OK. * own directories: needs to add Requires: logrotate polkit * no duplicate files: OK * file permissions: mostly OK. Oddness, may be explained away though... /etc/nova/* owned by root:nova, but not writeable by group. -rw-r--r--1 rootnova 4101 Aug 28 20:43 /etc/nova/api-paste.ini -rw-r-1 rootnova 453 Aug 26 14:39 /etc/nova/nova.conf /var/lib/nova and subdirs owned by nova:nobody. drwxr-xr-x2 novanobody 0 Aug 28 20:44 /var/lib/nova * consistent use of macros: OK * code or content: OK * large docs in subpackage: OK * nothing in %doc critical: OK * headers in -devel: N/A. OK * static libs in -static: N/A. OK * libs in -devel: N/A. OK * -devel requires base: N/A. OK * no libtool archives: OK * GUI with .desktop: N/A. OK * directory ownership: see above for logrotate and polkit * filenames UTF-8: OK SHOULDs: * source has license: OK * Translations in spec: N/A. OK * builds in mock: OK on F14 x86_64. Didn't try other arches. koji build fails in rawhide (see above). * build into binary arches: OK (via koji) * test the package: not done. * scriptlets must be sane: mostly OK. The only real problem is in the creation of the CA Cert in %post, which cannot happen in %post and must be moved to an initscript. The author notes this is problematic too, but you cannot assume that at %post time the kernel has enough entropy to be able to generate cryptographically secure keys. At least as an initscript there's a chance for interaction to ensure sufficient entropy. * require base package fully versioned: N/A. OK * pkgconfig files: N/A. OK * require package not file: N/A OK * manpages: none provided by upstream. Boo. rpmlint: $ rpmlint SPECS/openstack-nova.spec SRPMS/openstack-nova-2011.3-0.3.d4.fc14.src.rpm RPMS/noarch/* SPECS/openstack-nova.spec:365: W: macro-in-%changelog %config openstack-nova.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hypervisor - hyper visor, hyper-visor, supervisory openstack-nova.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hypervisors - hyper visors, hyper-visors, supervisors openstack-nova.src:365: W: macro-in-%changelog %config openstack-nova.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hypervisor - hyper visor, hyper-visor, supervisory openstack-nova.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hypervisors - hyper visors, hyper-visors, supervisors openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/openssl.cnf nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/run/nova nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/crl.pem nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/private/cakey.pem nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/genvpn.sh nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /etc/nova/nova.conf nova openstack-nova.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/nova/nova.conf 0640L openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/crl nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/buckets nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/serial nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/certs nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/reqs nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /etc/nova/api-paste.ini nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/newcerts nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/images nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/instances nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/private nova openstack-nova.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/nova/CA/private 0750L openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/openssl.cnf.tmpl nova openstack-nova.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/nova/CA/index.txt nova openstack-nova.noarch: W:
[Bug 717867] Review Request: ghc-http-types - Generic HTTP types for 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=717867 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-08-28 23:03:24 EDT --- Thank you for the review. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-http-types Short Description: Generic HTTP types for Haskell Owners: petersen Branches: f14 f15 f16 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #17 from Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com 2011-08-28 23:02:47 EDT --- Given this is targeting only recent distros (F15+), a few other changes should be made. * add tmpfiles.d config file https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d * add systemd unit files https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Systemd - when done, initscripts go into an optional subpackage. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730043] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch - Convert DateTimes to/from epoch seconds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730043 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 23:16:34 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch Short Description: Convert DateTimes to/from epoch seconds Owners: iarnell Branches: f14 f15 f16 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730043] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch - Convert DateTimes to/from epoch seconds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730043 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730043] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Epoch - Convert DateTimes to/from epoch seconds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730043 --- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 23:16:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) Just an old FSF address, no further issues. You might drop the LICENSE from files, because the package is licensed under the common Perl terms anyway. Already reported upstream. https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=70227 I can't simply drop it - licensing guidelines require that If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc Thanks, as ever, for the review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560787] Review Request: python-mtTkinter - A thread-safe version of Tkinter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560787 --- Comment #17 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 23:18:59 EDT --- Hi, I think the developer just used a directory to hold the sources and did not changed the release. I was just using the previous .tar.gz initially posted on the site ... I also fixed the file permission to 0644: SPEC: http://roma.fedorapeople.org/specs/python-mtTkinter.spec SRPM: http://roma.fedorapeople.org/srpms/python-mtTkinter-0.4-3.fc14.src.rpm Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727382] Review Request: django-recaptcha-works - Integrate the reCaptcha 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=727382 Arun SAG saga...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||saga...@gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Arun SAG saga...@gmail.com 2011-08-28 23:34:46 EDT --- I see the builds are there for rawhide and el6, no plans to have them in f15,f15? http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=12369 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 --- Comment #18 from Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com 2011-08-28 23:44:27 EDT --- How hard would it be to build the whole stack for EPEL 6 now also? :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662275] Review Request: hledger - A double-entry accounting tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662275 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|634048(Haskell-pkg-reviews) | 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 630299] Review Request: ghc-wai - Web Application Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630299 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||634048(Haskell-pkg-reviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717867] Review Request: ghc-http-types - Generic HTTP types for 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=717867 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|634048(Haskell-pkg-reviews) | Alias||ghc-http-types -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 733984] New: Review Request: perl-Sub-Exporter-ForMethods - Helper routines for using Sub::Exporter to build methods
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Sub-Exporter-ForMethods - Helper routines for using Sub::Exporter to build methods https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733984 Summary: Review Request: perl-Sub-Exporter-ForMethods - Helper routines for using Sub::Exporter to build methods Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Sub-Exporter-ForMethods/ OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: iarn...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-Sub-Exporter-ForMethods.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-Sub-Exporter-ForMethods-0.100050-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: This package provides helper routings for using Sub::Exporter to build methods that won't be removed by namespace::autoclean. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3307976 *rt-0.10_01 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
