[Bug 784613] Review Request: python-auth-credential - abstraction of a credential
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784613 massimo.pala...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from massimo.pala...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 02:56:47 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-auth-credential Short Description: Python abstraction of a credential Owners: mpaladin Branches: f16 f17 el5 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785639] Review Request: rubygem-multi_xml - A generic swappable back-end for XML parsing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785639
--- Comment #4 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com 2012-02-21
03:01:38 EST ---
First of all, this spec doesn't work on F17 at all.
- Please use the new style macros (like gem_dir instead of gemdir etc.).
- Then define the macros properly - %(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem::dir'
2/dev/null) now points to user's home. I suggest using some kind of
conditionals like this one:
%{!?gem_dir: %global gem_dir %(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem::dir' 2/dev/null)}
This way, if the gem_dir macro is defined in rubygems-devel, it will get used
(f17 or later), otherwise the former directories (f16 and before) will get in
place. Similarly for all the other macros (and you need to define gem_name, not
gemname in order for the macros in rubygems-devel to work properly).
- In Ruby 1.9.3, we have unbundled rubygem-bigdecimal, so in the f17 or
higher conditional, you need to add R: and BR: rubygem(bigdecimal).
Now some general comments:
- Please don't run the specs through rake. It draws in unnecessary dependencies
like yard (or the rake itself). Simple rspec spec suffices.
- Don't run tests in buildroot, we don't want to modify the files in resulting
package by sed just because we needed to run the tests in some particular way.
Instead, run the tests in BUILD (therefore in %check, do pushd
.%{gem_instdir}).
- Also, by not running the tests via rake, you just need to delete/comment out
the first two lines of spec/helper.rb and the tests run (you can do this in the
%check section (therefore in BUILD directory)).
- According to the new quidelines draft, you should exclude the cached version
of gem.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 195292] Review Request: Openbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195292 Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- 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 787293] Review Request: sparkleshare - Easy file sharing based on git repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787293 Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? Bug 787293 depends on bug 753364, which changed state. Bug 753364 Summary: Please upgrade nautilus-python to 1.1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=753364 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #12 from Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net 2012-02-21 03:57:48 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: sparkleshare Short Description: Easy file sharing based on git repositories Owners: comzeradd Branches: f16 f17 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 598860] Review Request: httpd-itk - MPM Itk for Apache HTTP 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=598860 --- Comment #15 from Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net 2012-02-21 04:09:30 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) Actually you're using tabs instead of spaces :) And in some cases you're mixing them. I believe it is not. Please say on what line and I'll fix it. Rpmlint silent about that. For instance you use tabs on BuildRequires lines but spaces on if block at line 79. You could add build requires dependencies one per line. It's more readable. It then increase size of file which already not so small. I think it is not block. Both this and the above are definitely not blockers. It's just friendly suggestions to make the spec more readable. Use the full length of a line for description, up to 80 characters. There no lines longer already. I meant the opposite :) Some lines should be longer. For instance the first one on the description block. Add some descriptive comments or/and upstream links on patches It there. I have slightly fix it and add URL on comment. Nice. Please keep track of this in order to update your spec in a future release. I'll do a format review asap. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 195292] Review Request: Openbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195292 Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||splinu...@gmail.com --- Comment #20 from Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 03:53:15 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: openbox New Branches: el6 Owners: mlichvar splinux -- 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 795679] New: Review Request: python-flexmock - Testing library that makes it easy to create mocks, stubs and fakes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-flexmock - Testing library that makes it easy to create mocks, stubs and fakes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795679 Summary: Review Request: python-flexmock - Testing library that makes it easy to create mocks, stubs and fakes Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bkab...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/flexmock/python-flexmock.spec SRPM URL: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/flexmock/python-flexmock-0.9.2-1.fc17.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3806808 Description: Flexmock is a testing library for Python that makes it easy to create mocks, stubs and fakes. The API is inspired by a Ruby library of the same name, but Python flexmock is not a clone of the Ruby version. It omits a number of redundancies in the Ruby flexmock API, alters some defaults, and introduces a number of Python-only features. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jrez...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@redhat.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 795696] New: Script Collection, a directory based BASH script framework, that helps users to install a GUI onto a minimal install.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Script Collection, a directory based BASH script framework, that helps users to install a GUI onto a minimal install. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795696 Summary: Script Collection, a directory based BASH script framework, that helps users to install a GUI onto a minimal install. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: noarch OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: arjuna.e...@web.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Its a script framework based upon bash and a directory structure to read libraries, templates or show a menu to the end user. Its main purpose is to guide a user from a minimal installation (maybe from minimal-spin in future?) to a graphical user interface. It does however, offer some more tools such as iso2usb, siggen, pwizer (kinda of leet speak converter) and others. What is prepared so far: * http://sf.net/p/seasc (source code, in sub projects) * http://sea.hostingsociety.com/rpm.sc.template.spec * http://sea.hostingsociety.com/changelog * http://sea.hostingsociety.com/sc-0.2.0.tar.gz (since its a script, there is no src rpm?) * http://sea.hostingsociety.com/sc-0.2.0-2.fc16.noarch.rpm This is my first package, so i'm looking for a sponsor who's willing to guide an eager and willing person. Thank you in advance and have a nice day. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787459] Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787459 Peter Borsa peter.bo...@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 743411] Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - Ninesixty theme for Drupal 7
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743411 --- Comment #13 from Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 05:53:00 EST --- *** Bug 787454 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787454] Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 7
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787454 Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE Last Closed||2012-02-21 05:53:00 --- Comment #4 from Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 05:53:00 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 743411 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 --- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 06:15:52 EST --- Summary: ok Name: ok License: ok Group: ok Url: ok Sources: see rpmlint output, ok BuildRoot: ok, but nod needed for el6 BRs: ok Reqs: ok Description: ok Macros used consistently: ok Files: %docs ok Defining Python macros is not needed anymore, applies for =5. Package does not conflicts with el6 PyQt4 as webkit submodule is disabled there. rpmlint PyQt4-webkit-4.6.2-8.el6.src.rpm PyQt4-webkit.src:29: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 29) Np for review, just fix it before import. PyQt4-webkit.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/static/Downloads/PyQt4/PyQt-x11-gpl-4.6.2.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Old 4.6.2 sources are not available anymore upstream, we need it for EL6. But the sources are already in 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 788990] Reivew Request: perl-OpenOffice-UNO - Interface to OpenOffice's UNO run-time
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788990 --- Comment #3 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 06:14:53 EST --- Review: --- TODO: The first patch contains binary diff of swap files, uh. We don't need this, do we? :) TODO: Add perl(Cwd), perl(Exporter), and perl(File::Path) do BRs -- those are dual-life packages TODO: Since you don't plan this for EPEL5, drop BuildRoot tag, %defattr and don't remove the buildroot in %install. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795696] Review Request: sc - A script collection to go from minimal install to GUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795696 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi Summary|Review Request - sc: A |Review Request: sc - A |script collection to go |script collection to go |from minimal install to GUI |from minimal install to GUI -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795696] Review Request - sc: A script collection to go from minimal install to GUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795696 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Summary|Script Collection, a|Review Request - sc: A |directory based BASH script |script collection to go |framework, that helps users |from minimal install to GUI |to install a GUI onto a | |minimal install.| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 --- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 06:46:53 EST --- One issue - please require PyQt4 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 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 --- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 06:51:28 EST --- Scratchbuild: ok, http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3807019 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784657] Review Request: python-mozbase - the Mozilla suite of Python utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784657 Jiri Moskovcak jmosk...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmosk...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jmosk...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784657] Review Request: python-mozbase - the Mozilla suite of Python utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784657
--- Comment #3 from Jiri Moskovcak jmosk...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 07:07:52
EST ---
- can't build it in koji:
Searching for mozinfo
Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/mozinfo/
Download error on http://pypi.python.org/simple/mozinfo/: [Errno -2] Name or
service not known -- Some packages may not be found!
Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/mozinfo/
Download error on http://pypi.python.org/simple/mozinfo/: [Errno -2] Name or
service not known -- Some packages may not be found!
Scanning index of all packages (this may take a while)
Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/
Couldn't find index page for 'mozinfo' (maybe misspelled?)
Download error on http://pypi.python.org/simple/: [Errno -2] Name or service
not known -- Some packages may not be found!
No local packages or download links found for mozinfo
error: Could not find suitable distribution for Requirement.parse('mozinfo')
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.SEwFLU (%check)
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.SEwFLU (%check)
RPM build errors:
Child returncode was: 1
EXCEPTION: Command failed. See logs for output.
# ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target noarch --nodeps
builddir/build/SPECS/python-mozbase.spec']
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py, line
70, in trace
result = func(*args, **kw)
File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mockbuild/util.py, line 352, in do
raise mockbuild.exception.Error, (Command failed. See logs for output.\n #
%s % (command,), child.returncode)
Error: Command failed. See logs for output.
# ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target noarch --nodeps
builddir/build/SPECS/python-mozbase.spec']
LEAVE do -- EXCEPTION RAISED
- full report:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3807028name=build.logoffset=-4000
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 --- Comment #4 from Ngo Than t...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 07:30:50 EST --- rpmlint PyQt4-webkit-4.6.2-8.el6.src.rpm PyQt4-webkit.src:29: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 29) fixed Np for review, just fix it before import. PyQt4-webkit.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/static/Downloads/PyQt4/PyQt-x11-gpl-4.6.2.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Old 4.6.2 sources are not available anymore upstream, we need it for EL6. But the sources are already in EL6. fixed new spec file and srpm is uploaded on same place -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788990] Reivew Request: perl-OpenOffice-UNO - Interface to OpenOffice's UNO run-time
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788990 --- Comment #4 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2012-02-21 07:48:53 EST --- SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/perl-OpenOffice-UNO.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/perl-OpenOffice-UNO-0.07-3.el6.src.rpm Addressed first two issues. The third one would make it harder to do an el5 rebuild, I'm keeping those lines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788990] Reivew Request: perl-OpenOffice-UNO - Interface to OpenOffice's UNO run-time
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788990 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 07:56:04 EST --- Seems sensible. Approving. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 07:53:53 EST --- Thanks Than, 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 788990] Reivew Request: perl-OpenOffice-UNO - Interface to OpenOffice's UNO run-time
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788990 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2012-02-21 08:00:35 EST --- Danke schon. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-OpenOffice-UNO Short Description: Interface to OpenOffice's UNO run-tume Owners: lkundrak Branches: f15 f16 f17 el6 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 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 --- Comment #6 from Ngo Than t...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 08:03:44 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: PyQt4-webkit Short Description: Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit Owners: than Branches: 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 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 Ngo Than t...@redhat.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 795566] Review Request: woden - Web Service Description Language (WSDL) validating parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795566 Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795566] Review Request: woden - Web Service Description Language (WSDL) validating parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795566 --- Comment #2 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:13:11 EST --- Thanks for pointing that out. Fixed: SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/woden.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/woden-1.0-0.1.M9.fc17.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 794988] Review Request: perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP - Blowfish encryption algorithm implemented purely in Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794988 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.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 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.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 795098] Review Request: startactive - An alternative Plasma session start script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795098 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 08:11:40 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: startactive Short Description: An alternative Plasma session start script Owners: jreznik rdieter kkofler than rnovacek Branches: f17 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 787658] Review Request: jgoodies-animation - Framework for time-based real-time animations in Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787658 Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-02-21 08:18:57 --- Comment #5 from Jaromír Cápík jca...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 08:18:57 EST --- Thanks guys. built ... closing ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787293] Review Request: sparkleshare - Easy file sharing based on git repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787293 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:39:56 EST --- 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 195292] Review Request: Openbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195292 --- Comment #21 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:37:55 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 787459] Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787459 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:40:18 EST --- 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 784603] Review Request: python-messaging - abstraction of a message
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784603 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:39:16 EST --- 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 788990] Reivew Request: perl-OpenOffice-UNO - Interface to OpenOffice's UNO run-time
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788990 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:40:57 EST --- 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 690025] Review Request: cminpack - Solver for nonlinear equations and nonlinear least squares problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690025 --- Comment #17 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:38:37 EST --- 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 784613] Review Request: python-auth-credential - abstraction of a credential
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784613 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:39:34 EST --- 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 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:41:22 EST --- 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 795098] Review Request: startactive - An alternative Plasma session start script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795098 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 08:43:16 EST --- 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 735225] Review Request: axis2c - Web services engine implemented in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735225 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 09:34:14 EST --- Besides *BARF*, no. :/ Okay. You're making the best of an ugly situation. 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 794990] Review Request: get-flash-videos - CLI tool to download flash video from websites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794990 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.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 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985
--- Comment #2 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 09:52:18 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[!]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[-]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: defattr() present in %files section. This is OK if packaging
for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[-]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[!]: 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 is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[!]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/contyk/src/review/794985/Data-AMF-0.09.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 51f3fe689f3d0b331c6ab14e03478b1b
MD5SUM upstream package : 51f3fe689f3d0b331c6ab14e03478b1b
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[!]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[-]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
Issues:
FIX: Don't depend directly on perl packages, use the 'perl(Module::Name)'
syntax instead. Remove all your perl-* BuildRequires.
FIX: Make sure you BuildRequire the following: perl(constant),
perl(Any::Moose), perl(Carp), perl(Cwd), perl(DateTime), perl(File::Path),
perl(File::Spec), perl(Scalar::Util), perl(Spiffy), perl(Test::More),
perl(UNIVERSAL::require), perl(XML::LibXML), perl(YAML::Base), and
perl(YAML::Node).
TIP: The number of spaces between your email and version in the changelog
header is a bit weird. Is there a reason for this?
TODO: Drop %defattr from %files. This is no longer needed.
FIX: Your %doc
[Bug 795801] New: Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing private methods at runtime
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing private methods at runtime https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795801 Summary: Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing private methods at runtime Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mgold...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/paranamer/1/paranamer.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/paranamer/1/paranamer-2.2-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: It is a library that allows the parameter names of non-private methods and constructors to be accessed at runtime. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3807546 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing private methods at runtime
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795801 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788630] Review Request: plexus-pom - Root Plexus Projects pom
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788630 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 10:07:21 EST --- Looks good now, just for future please raise release numbers during reviews. It makes reviewing much easier. 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 787658] Review Request: jgoodies-animation - Framework for time-based real-time animations in Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787658 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985 --- Comment #3 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 10:18:14 EST --- Thanks for review! I'll take care of the remarks, and also update the other in the same way. Stay tuned :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795099] Review Request: share-like-connect - Share, like and connect concept for Plasma Active
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795099 --- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 10:44:49 EST --- Name: ok Summary: ok License: ok, LGPLv2+ URL: ok Sources: ok (md5sum 432df8b41c6bcf807f3db66c7b676139) BRs: ok Description: ok Macros used consistently: ok Ldconfig: ok Docs: ok File section: ok Invalid soname: not ok, pls, check it. Otherwise really simple 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 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985 --- Comment #4 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 10:47:53 EST --- Okay, I'll wait :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787293] Review Request: sparkleshare - Easy file sharing based on git repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787293 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 10:47:20 EST --- sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.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 787293] Review Request: sparkleshare - Easy file sharing based on git repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787293 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|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 795099] Review Request: share-like-connect - Share, like and connect concept for Plasma Active
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795099 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 10:53:06 EST --- From KDE SIG meeting: Unversioned shlibs are not a review blocker. 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 795603] Review Request: perl-Tk-CursorControl - Manipulate the mouse cursor programmatically
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795603 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.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 787293] Review Request: sparkleshare - Easy file sharing based on git repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787293 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 11:05:53 EST --- sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790349] Review Request: perl-Filter - Perl source filters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790349 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 11:15:51 EST --- Updated package is on the same URL. I will put a notice here once I sub-package Filter from perl. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795099] Review Request: share-like-connect - Share, like and connect concept for Plasma Active
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795099 Radek Novacek rnova...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Radek Novacek rnova...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 11:14:39 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: share-like-connect Short Description: Share, like and connect concept for Plasma Active Owners: than rdieter jreznik ltinkl rnovacek kkofler Branches: f17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791263] Review Request: mockito - A Java mocking framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791263 --- Comment #9 from Roman Kennke rken...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 11:14:26 EST --- Thanks Alexander for the review! I fixed the Issues you mentioned and uploaded a new package: SPEC: http://icedrobot.de/~roman/mockito/2/mockito.spec SRPM: http://icedrobot.de/~roman/mockito/2/mockito-1.9.0-2.fc16.src.rpm I also have a number of additional questions: - The included Maven pom is lacking a bunch of dependencies: - cglib (and maybe asm) because upstream repackages and includes them in their own JAR. - JUnit4 because users of Mockito certainly must include that otherwise Mockito doesn't make sense. I suppose I need to patch-in at least the former two. Question: How do we deal with Maven dependency versions? In Maven I need to put an explicit in the dependency, which version should I pick? Do we also need to patch the versions of the existing dependencies (hamcrest, objenesis) to match what is in Fedora? - rpmlint complains about Requires: cglib, should I leave it out? Does rpm really figure out that dependency by itself as it claims? And why doesn't it complain about the other libs that I depend on? Cheers, Roman Issues: [!] Pom file is available in the maven directory - it would be good to install it(mockito-core.pom) I assume together with a depmap. This will simplify a number of other packages where we build with maven and patch to strip out mockito because it was not packaged. [!] Please include the shell script used for generating the tarball as Source1 in the spec [!] I suspect that there are missing Requires because there are too many BuildRequires but not Requires. Are they really build time only dependencies and not runtime? The mockito-core.pom lists hamcrest and objenesis as runtime dependencies, true? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795099] Review Request: share-like-connect - Share, like and connect concept for Plasma Active
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795099 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 11:21:35 EST --- 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 790347] Review Request: gfal - grid file access library, library for wlcg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790347 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 11:37:44 EST --- gfal-1.12.0-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gfal-1.12.0-3.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 768183] Review Request: is-interface - library for the information system in wlcg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768183 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 11:44:48 EST --- is-interface-1.12.1-8.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/is-interface-1.12.1-8.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 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 11:41:42 EST --- PyQt4-webkit-4.6.2-8.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/PyQt4-webkit-4.6.2-8.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 753517] Review Request: hoard - scalable memory allocator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=753517 --- Comment #5 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 11:42:26 EST --- Created attachment 564746 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=564746 Patch to make version 3.8 build If you want to package the latest version, here is a patch that not only solves the build failure, but also fixes some 32- versus 64-bit issues, and quiets a few other compiler warnings to boot. I have not sent this patch upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790349] Review Request: perl-Filter - Perl source filters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790349 --- Comment #3 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 11:44:44 EST --- Okay, looks good. I'll approve the package once the perl subpackage is ready. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790531] Review Request: PyQt4-webkit - Python bindings for Qt4 Webkit package epel 6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790531 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|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 795098] Review Request: startactive - An alternative Plasma session start script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795098 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 11:58:39 EST --- startactive-0.2-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/startactive-0.2-1.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795098] Review Request: startactive - An alternative Plasma session start script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795098 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-02-21 11:59:20 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790369] Review Request: perl-Digest-SHA - Perl extension for SHA-1/224/256/384/512
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790369 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.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 790369] Review Request: perl-Digest-SHA - Perl extension for SHA-1/224/256/384/512
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790369 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 12:21:37 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Digest-SHA Short Description: Perl extension for SHA-1/224/256/384/512 Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: 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 795603] Review Request: perl-Tk-CursorControl - Manipulate the mouse cursor programmatically
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795603
Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 12:26:53 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[!]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[-]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[-]: 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 is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/contyk/src/review/795603/Tk-CursorControl-0.4.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 67a170d3dde841d9c7054d0800162234
MD5SUM upstream package : 67a170d3dde841d9c7054d0800162234
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[-]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
Issues:
TODO: Please, buildrequire perl(Carp)
Approving.
Generated by fedora-review 0.1.1
External plugins:
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 750394] 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=750394 --- Comment #18 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2012-02-21 12:33:04 EST --- FESCO ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/807 Nothing special for the weak symbols. Built locally and installed and then ran rpmlint libmtcp (actually, rpmlint '*mtcp*'). Link command was: gcc -shared -Wl,-soname,libmtcp.so.1 -T mtcp.t -Wl,-Map,mtcp.map \ -Wl,--no-gc-sections -Wl,--no-strip-discarded \ -o libmtcp.so.1.0.0 mtcp.o mtcp_restart_nolibc.o mtcp_maybebpt.o mtcp_printf.o mtcp_util.o mtcp _safemmap.o mtcp_safe_open.o mtcp_state.o mtcp_check_vdso.o mtcp_sigaction.o mtcp_fastckpt.o -ldl -lpthread -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790369] Review Request: perl-Digest-SHA - Perl extension for SHA-1/224/256/384/512
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790369 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 12:40:02 EST --- Unretired devel branch. wtogami still owns EL-5 and EL-6. Please submit a package change request if you need addition fc branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787293] Review Request: sparkleshare - Easy file sharing based on git repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787293 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 12:45:03 EST --- sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 782250] Review Request: xml-maven-plugin - Maven XML plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782250 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|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 790369] Review Request: perl-Digest-SHA - Perl extension for SHA-1/224/256/384/512
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790369 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 12:49:16 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Digest-SHA New Branches: Owners: InitialCC: perl-sig You are right. Please add `perl-sig' user with watch* permissions only to `devel' branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790553] Review Request: xsom - XML Schema Object Model (XSOM)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790553 David Nalley da...@gnsa.us changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||da...@gnsa.us AssignedTo|agr...@gmail.com|da...@gnsa.us Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 2012-02-21 12:46:08 EST --- I'll get the first pass done this afternoon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782250] Review Request: xml-maven-plugin - Maven XML plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782250 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 12:48:57 EST --- xml-maven-plugin-1.0-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xml-maven-plugin-1.0-3.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790369] Review Request: perl-Digest-SHA - Perl extension for SHA-1/224/256/384/512
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790369 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 12:55:05 EST --- 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 795883] Review Request: python-tgcaptcha2 - TurboGears captcha plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795883 --- Comment #1 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2012-02-21 12:56:12 EST --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3808198 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 735225] Review Request: axis2c - Web services engine implemented in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735225 Garrett Holmstrom gho...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Garrett Holmstrom gho...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 12:56:46 EST --- Thanks, spot. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: axis2c Short Description: Web services engine implemented in C Owners: gholms Branches: master f16 el6 el5 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 795883] New: Review Request: python-tgcaptcha2 - TurboGears captcha plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-tgcaptcha2 - TurboGears captcha plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795883 Summary: Review Request: python-tgcaptcha2 - TurboGears captcha plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pin...@pingoured.fr QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs//python-tgcaptcha2.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs//python-tgcaptcha2-0.2.0-1.el6.src.rpm Description: TGCaptcha2 is a TurboGears widget that provides an easy way to incorporate a captcha as part a form in an attempt to reduce spam or malicious activity. Features include: * (Relatively) pain-free usage and validation inside of a regular widget-based form * Flexibility to add or extend image generation algorithms and the text displayed in the image Enhanced with: * Embed a word in the image or an equation that the user has to solve * Add an audio captch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791263] Review Request: mockito - A Java mocking framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791263 --- Comment #10 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 13:00:23 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) Thanks Alexander for the review! I fixed the Issues you mentioned and uploaded a new package: SPEC: http://icedrobot.de/~roman/mockito/2/mockito.spec SRPM: http://icedrobot.de/~roman/mockito/2/mockito-1.9.0-2.fc16.src.rpm I also have a number of additional questions: - The included Maven pom is lacking a bunch of dependencies: - cglib (and maybe asm) because upstream repackages and includes them in their own JAR. - JUnit4 because users of Mockito certainly must include that otherwise Mockito doesn't make sense. I suppose I need to patch-in at least the former two. Question: How do we deal with Maven dependency versions? In Maven I need to put an explicit in the dependency, which version should I pick? Do we also need to patch the versions of the existing dependencies (hamcrest, objenesis) to match what is in Fedora? Yes, adding them to the pom after unbundling is the way. Versions don't matter for Fedora per se because our maven ignores them anyway, so I guess it's up to you and how you want to handle it. The only change would be if you wanted to upstream this patch, which might be tricky. - rpmlint complains about Requires: cglib, should I leave it out? Does rpm really figure out that dependency by itself as it claims? And why doesn't it complain about the other libs that I depend on? Nope, rpmlint just sees *lib and thinks it knows, but it doesn't :-) Leave it in or we'd have missing deps. I'll let Alex continue with the rest :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 735225] Review Request: axis2c - Web services engine implemented in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735225 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 13:04:53 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). Added f17. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795696] Review Request: sc - A script collection to go from minimal install to GUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795696 Simon A. Erat erat.si...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|rawhide |16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985 --- Comment #5 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 13:34:12 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) [cut] Issues: FIX: Don't depend directly on perl packages, use the 'perl(Module::Name)' syntax instead. Remove all your perl-* BuildRequires. Done FIX: Make sure you BuildRequire the following: [cut] Done TIP: The number of spaces between your email and version in the changelog header is a bit weird. Is there a reason for this? I keep them right-adjusted to make them stand out when the comment lines grow longer. It's just a habit, I can adjust you think it's a bad one. TODO: Drop %defattr from %files. This is no longer needed. Done FIX: Your %doc is empty. Include the relevant documentation, e.g. '%doc Changes LICENSE README'. Done (how could I miss that?) FIX: Remove all your perl-* explicit Requires. One of the reasons is the one I mentioned earlier, another is rpmbuild generates those (or most of, nothing's perfect) automatically, hence you only have to Require those: perl(DateTime) and perl(XML::LibXML) Done FIX items are blockers. I see you've also submitted other Perl packages. I'll do the reviews and sponsor you if you manage to fix everything :) I have updated those packages as well, new links should be in place soon. Generated by fedora-review 0.1.1 Kind of curious on that tool :) --a New links: spec: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP-2/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP.spec srpm: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP-2/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP-1.12-2.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 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985 --- Comment #6 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 13:38:25 EST --- Oops, wrong links again. New try: spec: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/perl-Data-AMF-2/perl-Data-AMF.spec srpm: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/perl-Data-AMF-2/perl-Data-AMF-0.09-2.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 794988] Review Request: perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP - Blowfish encryption algorithm implemented purely in Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794988 --- Comment #2 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 13:41:29 EST --- Updated after review of perl-Data-AMF. spec: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP-2/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP.spec srpm: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP-2/perl-Crypt-Blowfish_PP-1.12-2.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 794990] Review Request: get-flash-videos - CLI tool to download flash video from websites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794990 --- Comment #6 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 13:47:08 EST --- Updated after review of perl-Data-AMF. New links: spec: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/get-flash-videos-2/get_flash_videos.spec srpm: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17870887/get-flash-videos-2/get-flash-videos-1.24-3.20120205git8abc6c6.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 795679] Review Request: python-flexmock - Testing library that makes it easy to create mocks, stubs and fakes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795679 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-02-21 13:50:20 EST --- I'll take this one -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985 --- Comment #7 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 14:07:38 EST --- Including LICENSE created a fsf-address error. It's reported upstream: https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=75198 (had to wait for CPAN to come back online) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 750394] 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=750394 --- Comment #19 from Kapil Arya ka...@ccs.neu.edu 2012-02-21 14:15:10 EST --- Thanks for opening the ticket, Orion. Do I need to do anything on that ticket? Also, I will get a F16 32-bit VM and will try to reproduce the weak symbol warnings to fix them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 444235] Review Request: djview4 - DjVu viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444235 Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jonathan.underw...@gmail.co ||m Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 13:19:49 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: djview4 New Branches: el6 Owners: jgu InitialCC: terjeros -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 750394] 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=750394 --- Comment #20 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2012-02-21 14:17:48 EST --- (In reply to comment #19) Thanks for opening the ticket, Orion. Do I need to do anything on that ticket? I'll let you know, but I don't think 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 444235] Review Request: djview4 - DjVu viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444235 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-02-21 13:32:46 EST --- 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 791263] Review Request: mockito - A Java mocking framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791263 --- Comment #11 from Roman Kennke rken...@redhat.com 2012-02-21 15:03:00 EST --- Thanks Alexander for the review! I fixed the Issues you mentioned and uploaded a new package: SPEC: http://icedrobot.de/~roman/mockito/2/mockito.spec SRPM: http://icedrobot.de/~roman/mockito/2/mockito-1.9.0-2.fc16.src.rpm I also have a number of additional questions: - The included Maven pom is lacking a bunch of dependencies: - cglib (and maybe asm) because upstream repackages and includes them in their own JAR. - JUnit4 because users of Mockito certainly must include that otherwise Mockito doesn't make sense. I suppose I need to patch-in at least the former two. Question: How do we deal with Maven dependency versions? In Maven I need to put an explicit in the dependency, which version should I pick? Do we also need to patch the versions of the existing dependencies (hamcrest, objenesis) to match what is in Fedora? Yes, adding them to the pom after unbundling is the way. Versions don't matter for Fedora per se because our maven ignores them anyway, so I guess it's up to you and how you want to handle it. The only change would be if you wanted to upstream this patch, which might be tricky. Well for upstream it'd actually be easy since I can just put any version that is in Maven central and works with Mockito. I found another problem: it seems like cglib in Fedora doesn't install a pom, even though there seems to be one in Maven central. What should I do with it? Asm is not used directly by Mockito, only cglib requires and depends on it (transitively), therefore I don't need to put it into mockito's pom. - rpmlint complains about Requires: cglib, should I leave it out? Does rpm really figure out that dependency by itself as it claims? And why doesn't it complain about the other libs that I depend on? Nope, rpmlint just sees *lib and thinks it knows, but it doesn't :-) Leave it in or we'd have missing deps. Ok alright :-) I'll let Alex continue with the rest :-) Yep, thanks alot! Roman -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790553] Review Request: xsom - XML Schema Object Model (XSOM)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790553
--- Comment #3 from David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 2012-02-21 15:08:39 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[X] Rpmlint output:
[ke4qqq@nalleyx200 SPECS]$ rpmlint xsom.spec
../SRPMS/xsom-20110809-2.fc16.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/xsom-*
xsom.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: xsom-20110809.tar.gz
xsom.src: W: invalid-url Source0: xsom-20110809.tar.gz
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[!] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
Version should almost certainly be 0, and the date moved to the release field
i.e.
Version: 0
Release: 2-20110809%{?dist}
[X] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[X] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[X] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[X] Buildroot definition is not present
[X] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPLv2 with classpath exception or CDDL
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Dual_Licensing_Scenarios
This should be
License: CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions
instead of:
License: CDDL and GPLv2 with exceptions
[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.
[X] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[X] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
This is pulled from an SVN checkout.
[X] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[X} Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[X] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[X] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[X] Permissions on files are set properly.
[X] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[X] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[X] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[X] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[X] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[X] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[X] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[X] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[X] Package uses %global not %define
[X] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[X] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
Though I'll comment that I think normal practice is to delete these as part of
the %prep rather than during building the tarball.
[X] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[X] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[X] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[X] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[X] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[X] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[X] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[X] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[X] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[X] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[X] Latest version is packaged.
=== Issues ===
[!] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
Version should almost certainly be 0, and the date moved to the release field
i.e.
Version: 0
Release: 2-20110809%{?dist}
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPLv2 with classpath exception or CDDL
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Dual_Licensing_Scenarios
This
[Bug 795679] Review Request: python-flexmock - Testing library that makes it easy to create mocks, stubs and fakes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795679
Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mru...@matthias-runge.de
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-02-21
15:22:53 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[x]: 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 is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint python-flexmock-0.9.2-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
python-flexmock.noarch: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint python-flexmock-0.9.2-1.fc18.src.rpm
python-flexmock.src: W: invalid-url Source1: python-flexmock-0.9.2-tests.tgz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/mrunge/795679/flexmock-0.9.2.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 5d724b9dd2566b84633534c1e4076eea
MD5SUM upstream package : 5d724b9dd2566b84633534c1e4076eea
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: 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.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
Note: Source0:
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/f/flexmock/flexmock-0.9.2.tar.gz
(flexmock-0.9.2.tar.gz)
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if
[Bug 788080] Review Request: python-xhtml2pdf - HTML/CSS to PDF converter based on Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788080 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-02-21 15:33:56 EST --- python-xhtml2pdf-0.0.3-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-xhtml2pdf-0.0.3-3.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
