[Bug 798891] New: Review Request: libtranslit - transliteration library with multiple backends
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libtranslit - transliteration library with multiple backends https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798891 Summary: Review Request: libtranslit - transliteration library with multiple backends Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: du...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, i18n-b...@lists.fedoraproject.org, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/libtranslit/libtranslit.spec SRPM URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/libtranslit/libtranslit-0.0.1-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: GObject-based Unicode transliteration library with multiple backends. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798738] Review request: mysqlenum - is an automatic blind SQL injection tool.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798738 pjp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #2 from pjp 2012-03-01 03:31:21 EST --- Oops sorry,(In reply to comment #1) > pjp, you can't review your own package. > You should only set fedora-review-flag if you're going to do a review. Oh, sorry about that, got confused. > One minor: If you're not going to submit this for el5, then you should remove > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT from install section. Why not, I can submit it for el5 as well. Hope that's ok. Thank you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784769] Review Request: ghc-transformers-base - Haskell monad transformer lifting library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784769 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen 2012-03-01 03:36:29 EST --- Thank you for reviewing New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-transformers-base Short Description: Haskell monad transformer lifting library Owners: petersen Branches: f17 f16 f15 el6 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784769] Review Request: ghc-transformers-base - Haskell monad transformer lifting library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784769 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|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 788258] Review Request: perl-Module-Implementation - Loads one of several alternate underlying implementations for a module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788258 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Module-Implementation- ||0.06-1.fc18 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-03-01 03:45:03 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784759] Review Request: ghc-fast-logger - Fast logging library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784759 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|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 784759] Review Request: ghc-fast-logger - Fast logging library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784759 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen 2012-03-01 03:44:25 EST --- Thanks for the review and spotting new release. I will update to the latest version when importing. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-fast-logger Short Description: Fast logging library Owners: petersen Branches: f17 f16 f15 el6 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784799] Review Request: ghc-monad-control - Lift control operations through monad transformers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784799 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||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 784799] Review Request: ghc-monad-control - Lift control operations through monad transformers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784799 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|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 747031] Review Request: ghc-hs-bibutils - Haskell bindings to bibutils, the bibliography conversion 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=747031 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||NotReady -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664221] Review Request: ghc-cautious-file - Provides ways to write a file cautiously
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664221 Lakshmi Narasimhan changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Lakshmi Narasimhan 2012-03-01 03:56:14 EST --- Thanks for the review. I will incorporate the patch. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-cautious-file Short Description: Provides ways to write a file cautiously Owners: narasim Branches: f17 f16 f15 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798738] Review request: mysqlenum - is an automatic blind SQL injection tool.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798738 Jan Lieskovsky changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|Security| CC||jlies...@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 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 #13 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:15:17 EST --- gfal-1.12.0-4.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gfal-1.12.0-4.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798738] Review request: mysqlenum - is an automatic blind SQL injection tool.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798738 --- Comment #3 from Jan Lieskovsky 2012-03-01 04:12:50 EST --- Removed the 'Security' keyword. Please don't use that one for cases like this, as it has different purpose. This is not a security issue, just package review request. Regards, Jan. -- Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Response Team -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 04:19:51 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:19:51 EST --- sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|gridftp-ifce-2.1.3-4.el5|is-interface-1.12.1-8.fc15 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:23:38 EST --- is-interface-1.12.1-8.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782957] Review Request: musca - A simple dynamic window manager fox X
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782957 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|musca-0.9.24-3.fc17 |musca-0.9.24-2.fc16 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:28:20 EST --- musca-0.9.24-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 760943] Review Request: perl-Messaging-Message - This perl module provides an abstraction of a "message", as used in messaging
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760943 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Messaging-Message-0.8- |perl-Messaging-Message-0.8- |1.el6 |1.fc16 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:30:49 EST --- perl-Messaging-Message-0.8-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788718] Review Request: clalsadrv - An ALSA driver C++ library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788718 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|clalsadrv-2.0.0-3.fc17 |clalsadrv-2.0.0-3.fc16 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:26:31 EST --- clalsadrv-2.0.0-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769096] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-sustmi - Include two extensions, windowoverlay-icons and historymanager-prefix-search
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769096 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||gnome-shell-extension-sustm ||i-3.0-6.git72282ce.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 04:30:04 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:30:04 EST --- gnome-shell-extension-sustmi-3.0-6.git72282ce.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788815] Review Request: python-ZSI - python Zolera Soap Infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788815 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-ZSI-2.0-12.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 04:32:41 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:32:41 EST --- python-ZSI-2.0-12.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 755510] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet - Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510 --- Comment #18 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr 2012-03-01 04:35:28 EST --- Hello, New upstream (display battery information added) and bug correction release, and as usual new SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing. New rpmlint reports provided too. I think it would be worth to notice that from Gnome-Shell 3.3/3.4 according to the new README.md file and the website, installation could be done in "One Click Install via https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/120/system-monitor/";. As my production host is F-16, I haven't tested this feature and I cannot say if it's working. Maybe this review become useless for these new Gnome-Shell versions, but still useful for older ones (F-16 for example)? Caution: previous version of SRPMS and RPMS files are no longer available on my dropbox shared folder. Rawhide Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/Fedora/Rawhide/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet.spec Rawhide SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/Fedora/Rawhide/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet-2.0b1-0.1.git68ff8e4.fc18.src.rpm Rawhide RPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/Fedora/Rawhide/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet-2.0b1-0.1.git68ff8e4.fc18.noarch.rpm F-16 RPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/Fedora/F-16/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet-2.0b1-0.1.git68ff8e4.fc16.noarch.rpm F-17 RPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/Fedora/F-17/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet-2.0b1-0.1.git68ff8e4.fc17.noarch.rpm Project URL: https://github.com/paradoxxxzero/gnome-shell-system-monitor-applet rpmlint for Rawhide $ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet.spec gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: paradoxxxzero-gnome-shell-system-monitor-applet-2.0b1-12-g68ff8e4.tar.gz 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet-2.0b1-0.1.gitd25def6.fc18.src.rpm gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet.src: W: invalid-url Source0: paradoxxxzero-gnome-shell-system-monitor-applet-2.0b1-12-g68ff8e4.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Any comments are welcome! Cordially, -- NVieville -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794980] Review Request: zanshin - Todo/action management software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794980 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|zanshin-0.2.1-1.fc17|zanshin-0.2.1-1.fc16 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:32:10 EST --- zanshin-0.2.1-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788718] Review Request: clalsadrv - An ALSA driver C++ library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788718 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|clalsadrv-2.0.0-3.fc16 |clalsadrv-2.0.0-3.fc15 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:34:59 EST --- clalsadrv-2.0.0-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794980] Review Request: zanshin - Todo/action management software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794980 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|zanshin-0.2.1-1.fc16|zanshin-0.2.1-1.fc15 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:36:11 EST --- zanshin-0.2.1-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 781870] Review Request: sord - A lightweight C library for storing RDF in memory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781870 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||sord-0.5.0-3.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 04:35:41 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 04:35:41 EST --- sord-0.5.0-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798200] Review Request: dbus-tools - DBus developer tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798200 Michal Minar changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Michal Minar 2012-03-01 04:43:00 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: dbus-tools Short Description: DBus developer tools Owners: miminar Branches: f15 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 784591] Review Request: glazedlists - A Java toolkit for transformations 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=784591 Tomas Radej changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Tomas Radej 2012-03-01 05:31:33 EST --- This looks good. *** 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 791312] Review Request: jexcelapi - A Java API to read, write and modify Excel spreadsheets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791312 Juan Hernández changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||juan.hernan...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Juan Hernández 2012-03-01 05:39:52 EST --- I am taking this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730234] Review Request: jboss-ejb-3.1-api - EJB 3.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730234 Tomas Radej changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW AssignedTo|tra...@redhat.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #2 from Tomas Radej 2012-03-01 05:42:38 EST --- I am releasing this bug, I may re-take it when the dependent package is resolved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #4 from Pierre-YvesChibon 2012-03-01 05:52:19 EST --- Ok I cleaned the spec file as I don't plan to ask for EL5 branch for the moment at least. I also fixed the tarball. Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs//python-tgcaptcha2.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs//python-tgcaptcha2-0.2.0-2.el6.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 791312] Review Request: jexcelapi - A Java API to read, write and modify Excel spreadsheets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791312
Juan Hernández changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juan.hernan...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Juan Hernández 2012-03-01
06:07:14 EST ---
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
Result of rpmlint of the SRPM:
jexcelapi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlet -> settler
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Result of rpmlint of the binary RPMs:
jexcelapi.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlet -> settler
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3842979
[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].
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[-] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[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.
[-] 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
[!] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[-] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [1] 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.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
=== Issues ===
1. The rpmlit warning about "servlet" is acceptable.
2. The javadoc package is missing "Required: jpackage-utils".
=== Final Notes ===
1. You may want to use %{_javadir} in the patch for the ant build file instead
of absolute path names, something like invoking ant with the
"-D_javadir=%{_javadir}" option and then use "${_javadir}/..." in the build
files.
2. Fix issue #2 and will approve.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproje
[Bug 794923] Review Request: stax-utils - StAX utility classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794923 Juan Hernández changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||juan.hernan...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juan.hernan...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Juan Hernández 2012-03-01 06:31:40 EST --- I am taking this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730234] Review Request: jboss-ejb-3.1-api - EJB 3.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730234 Tomas Radej changed: What|Removed |Added CC|tra...@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 750911] Review Request: moconti - Web Application Server for Sleep
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=750911 Tomas Radej changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC|tra...@redhat.com | Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #2 from Tomas Radej 2012-03-01 06:42:57 EST --- Releasing it, the package this one is depending on is not resolved yet. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Matthias Runge 2012-03-01 06:44:00 EST --- OK, all issues cleaned. Package approved -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783837] Review Request: php-pecl-http - Extended HTTP support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783837 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mru...@matthias-runge.de Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Matthias Runge 2012-03-01 06:51:26 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 794923] Review Request: stax-utils - StAX utility classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794923
--- Comment #2 from Juan Hernández 2012-03-01
07:05:28 EST ---
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
Result of rpmlint of the SRPM:
stax-utils.src: W: invalid-url Source0: stax-utils-20110309.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Result of rpmlint of the binary RPMs:
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[!] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
Version should be 0 and release should be 0.1.20110309svn.
[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.
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3843082
[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].
[!] 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.
Should include LICENSE instead of (or in addition to) COPYRIGHT.TXT.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[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, ...)
[!] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
The following jar files are not removed before build:
./stax-utils-20110309/lib/src/jsr173_1.0_javadoc.jar
./stax-utils-20110309/lib/src/jsr173_1.0_src.jar
./stax-utils-20110309/lib/jars/junit.jar
./stax-utils-20110309/lib/jars/jsr173_1.0_api.jar
./stax-utils-20110309/lib/jars/jsr173_1.0_ri.jar
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [1] 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.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
=== Issues ===
1. The rpmlint warning about the source URL is normal and acceptable.
2. The upstream project doesn't tag releases since 7 years ago, and those tags
are apparently date based, so I think we should treat this as pre-release,
putting 0 in the version tag and 0.1.20110309svn in the release tag. However
there is a date used as version in the POM, so I am not completely against
using this date as the version tag. Let me know what you think.
3. The file "LICENSE" contains an updated version of "COPYRIGHT.TXT" with two
additional copyright holders. I think that this "LICENSE" file shou
[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 #6 from Pierre-YvesChibon 2012-03-01 07:09:06 EST --- Thanks for the review New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-tgcaptcha2 Short Description: TurboGears captcha plugin Owners: pingou Branches: 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 783837] Review Request: php-pecl-http - Extended HTTP support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783837
Matthias Runge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Matthias Runge 2012-03-01
07:07:13 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
C/C++
[x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if
present.
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 %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[!]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
Note: defattr() present in %files devel 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.
[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 Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[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 Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if 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 License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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 No %config files under /usr.
[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.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint php-pecl-http-devel-2.0.0-0.4.dev5.fc18.i686.rpm
php-pecl-http-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint php-pecl-http-2.0.0-0.4.dev5.fc18.i686.rpm
php-pecl-http.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US charset -> char
set, char-set, catharses
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint php-pecl-http-2.0.0-0.4.dev5.fc18.src.rpm
php-pecl-http.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US charset -> char set,
char-set, catharses
php-pecl-http.src: W: file-size-mismatch pecl_http-2.0.0dev5.tgz = 123166,
http://pecl.php.net/get/pecl_http-2.0.0dev5.tgz = 122160
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
rpmlint php-pecl-http-debuginfo-2.0.0-0.4.dev5.fc18.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[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 val
[Bug 783837] Review Request: php-pecl-http - Extended HTTP support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783837 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Remi Collet 2012-03-01 07:21:05 EST --- Thanks for the review. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: php-pecl-http Short Description: Extended HTTP support Owners: remi 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 798715] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798715 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov 2012-03-01 07:30:51 EST --- *** Bug 798703 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 798715] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798715 --- Comment #4 from Alexander Kurtakov 2012-03-01 07:31:01 EST --- *** Bug 798714 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 798703] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798703 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||akurt...@redhat.com Resolution||DUPLICATE Last Closed||2012-03-01 07:30:51 --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov 2012-03-01 07:30:51 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 798715 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798714] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798714 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||akurt...@redhat.com Resolution||DUPLICATE Last Closed||2012-03-01 07:31:01 --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov 2012-03-01 07:31:01 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 798715 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798977] New: Review Request: GemRB - a portable Open Source implementation of BioWare's Infinity Engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: GemRB - a portable Open Source implementation of BioWare's Infinity Engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798977 Summary: Review Request: GemRB - a portable Open Source implementation of BioWare's Infinity Engine Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: hub...@slosarski.pl 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://db.tt/3BKZ6nHq SRPM URL: http://db.tt/NCjlvKZT Description: GemRB (Game engine made with preRendered Background) is a portable Open Source implementation of BioWare's Infinity Engine which was written to support pseudo-3D role playing games based on the Dungeons & Dragons ruleset (like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Planescape: Torment). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798741] Review Request: perl-WebService-Rajce - Perl interface for www.rajce.idnes.cz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798741 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@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 798977] Review Request: GemRB - a portable Open Source implementation of BioWare's Infinity Engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798977 Hubert "Schlussarz" Ślósarski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Pierre-YvesChibon 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 791222] Review Request: jamonapi - A Java monitoring API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791222 Juan Hernández changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juan.hernan...@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 760177] Review Request: knot - Authoritative DNS 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=760177 --- Comment #7 from Stanislav Petr 2012-03-01 08:12:47 EST --- Sorry for long response time. Updated .spec and .src.rpm is located here: http://my.glux.org/fedora/packages/knot/knot.spec http://my.glux.org/fedora/packages/knot/knot-1.0.0-4.fc16.src.rpm KNOT-DNS is now updated to yesterday released first stable version 1.0.0 and are fixed probably all problems in package building. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798741] Review Request: perl-WebService-Rajce - Perl interface for www.rajce.idnes.cz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798741
Petr Šabata changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Petr Šabata 2012-03-01 08:19:49 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 %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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
[-]: 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.
[-]: MUST Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[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 Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if 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 License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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/798741/WebService-Rajce-0.07.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 1b8a5cb57db7ccc65ae1400dbee95b65
MD5SUM upstream package : 1b8a5cb57db7ccc65ae1400dbee95b65
[!]: 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.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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 Latest version is packaged.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
Issues:
NOTE: I'd remove the second sentence from the base packa
[Bug 798741] Review Request: perl-WebService-Rajce - Perl interface for www.rajce.idnes.cz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798741 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar 2012-03-01 08:30:44 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-WebService-Rajce Short Description: Perl interface for www.rajce.idnes.cz Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: f16 f17 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 798741] Review Request: perl-WebService-Rajce - Perl interface for www.rajce.idnes.cz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798741 Petr Pisar 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 798998] New: Review Request: libcdr - a library for import of Corel Draw drawings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libcdr - a library for import of Corel Draw drawings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798998 Summary: Review Request: libcdr - a library for import of Corel Draw drawings Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: dtar...@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://dtardon.fedorapeople.org/libcdr.spec SRPM URL: http://dtardon.fedorapeople.org/libcdr-0.0.3-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Libcdr is library providing ability to interpret and import Corel Draw drawings into various applications. It will be a dependency of libreoffice 3.6 . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790256] Review Request: ha-jdbc - High-Availability JDBC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790256 Marek Goldmann changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Marek Goldmann 2012-03-01 09:47:47 EST --- *** 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 798657] Review Request: perl-Test-Moose-More - More tools for testing Moose packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798657 Petr Šabata 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 798657] Review Request: perl-Test-Moose-More - More tools for testing Moose packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798657
Petr Šabata changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Petr Šabata 2012-03-01 10:30:17 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 %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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
[-]: 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 Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[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 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/798657/Test-Moose-More-0.005.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 26959b7f6715008a7257edd3c09329f4
MD5SUM upstream package : 26959b7f6715008a7257edd3c09329f4
[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.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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 Latest version is packaged.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
Issues:
No issues.
Approving.
Generated by fedora-review 0.2.0git
External plugins:
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: -
[Bug 799023] New: Review Request: eot-utils - Tools to convert OTF/TTF to EOT font format + show its metadata
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eot-utils - Tools to convert OTF/TTF to EOT font format + show its metadata https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799023 Summary: Review Request: eot-utils - Tools to convert OTF/TTF to EOT font format + show its metadata Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jpoko...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- This package enables exporting OTF/TTF into EOT format (for MSIE). EOT is the only web font format not supported by FontForge. Having such converter also enables selected fonts being additionally packaged in the formats for web (beside OTF/TTF: WOFF, SVG, EOT), if there will be such need/fonts SIG decides so. Also Liberation might be distributed as an additional archive of web font formats. CC'ing people I had a discussion about this. Spec URL: http://jpokorny.fedorapeople.org/eot-utils/eot-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://jpokorny.fedorapeople.org/eot-utils/eot-utils-1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: The eot-utils are the two programs mkeot and eotinfo. The former creates an EOT (Embedded OpenType) file from an OpenType or TrueType font and the URLs of one or more Web pages, respecting the TrueType embedding bits. The eotinfo program displays EOT meta-data in a human-readable way. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798657] Review Request: perl-Test-Moose-More - More tools for testing Moose packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798657 Petr Pisar 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 798657] Review Request: perl-Test-Moose-More - More tools for testing Moose packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798657 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar 2012-03-01 10:46:42 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Test-Moose-More Short Description: More tools for testing Moose packages 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 480724] Review Request: ndjbdns - New djbdns, usable djbdns.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724 --- Comment #55 from Rahul Sundaram 2012-03-01 10:59:27 EST --- Is this necessary? -- export CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $RPM_OPT_FLAGS" The following is redundant: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %defattr(-,root,root,-) Although not a blocker, I strongly urge you to consider renaming filepaths with the project name. /etc/ndjbdns instead of /etc/djbdns for instance to avoid confusion with the original project. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790628] Review Request: Adobe Source Libraries - General Purpose Addon for Boost and STL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790628 Alec Leamas changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #22 from Alec Leamas 2012-03-01 12:17:49 EST --- Removing FE-NEEDSPONSOR since I'm nowadays is sponsored. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #14 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 12:33:56 EST --- gfal-1.12.0-4.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gfal-1.12.0-4.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 798681] Review Request: python-pyotp - Python One Time Password library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798681 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi 2012-03-01 13:40:33 EST --- I'd be happy to review this. Look for a full review hopefully later today. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799089] New: Review Request: dyninst - An API for Run-time Code Generation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dyninst - An API for Run-time Code Generation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799089 Summary: Review Request: dyninst - An API for Run-time Code Generation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: wco...@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://people.redhat.com/wcohen/dyninst/dyninst.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/wcohen/dyninst/dyninst-7.0.1-0.3.fc16.src.rpm Description: Dyninst is an Application Program Interface (API) to permit the insertion of code into a running program. The API also permits changing or removing subroutine calls from the application program. Run-time code changes are useful to support a variety of applications including debugging, performance monitoring, and to support composing applications out of existing packages. The goal of this API is to provide a machine independent interface to permit the creation of tools and applications that use run-time code patching. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799089] Review Request: dyninst - An API for Run-time Code Generation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799089 --- Comment #1 from William Cohen 2012-03-01 13:41:42 EST --- I am able to build the package as a scratch build on f16: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3843699 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518318] Review Request: vanessa_socket - Simplify TCP/IP socket operations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518318 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(pa...@hubbitus.in | |fo) | --- Comment #15 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2012-03-01 14:29:11 EST --- Sorry, domain changed. Yes, I ready continue. Package updated to last version. http://hubbitus.info/rpm/Fedora16/vanessa_socket/vanessa_socket-0.0.12-1.fc16.src.rpm http://hubbitus.info/rpm/Fedora16/vanessa_socket/vanessa_socket.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 #18 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2012-03-01 14:54:43 EST --- Good catch. Thank you. Fixed: http://hubbitus.info/rpm/Fedora16/httpd-itk/httpd-itk.spec http://hubbitus.info/rpm/Fedora16/httpd-itk/httpd-itk-2.2.22-3.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794923] Review Request: stax-utils - StAX utility classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794923 --- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm 2012-03-01 14:56:30 EST --- I was actually wrong about this being a requirement for spring; it's actually only a requirement for mule, and since there are concerns about it not having very sane versioning and completely lacking any official release, I'm going to put it on hold for now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790256] Review Request: ha-jdbc - High-Availability JDBC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790256 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Andy Grimm 2012-03-01 15:12:50 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ha-jdbc Short Description: High-availability JDBC Owners: arg 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 791222] Review Request: jamonapi - A Java monitoring API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791222 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Andy Grimm 2012-03-01 15:15:21 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jamonapi Short Description: A Java monitoring API Owners: arg 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 790256] Review Request: ha-jdbc - High-availability JDBC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790256 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: ha-jdbc - |Review Request: ha-jdbc - |High-Availability JDBC |High-availability JDBC -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798715] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798715 --- Comment #5 from Franco Comida 2012-03-01 15:19:51 EST --- The LibRaw-0.14 package is already on rawhide. I successfully built it with koji on f16. I am also in contact with the old maintainer who is willing to help with the review -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791312] Review Request: jexcelapi - A Java API to read, write and modify Excel spreadsheets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791312 --- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm 2012-03-01 15:27:24 EST --- Fixed: SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/jexcelapi.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/jexcelapi-2.6.12-3.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 787738] Review Request: wss4j - Apache WS-Security implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787738 Andy Grimm 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 787738] Review Request: wss4j - Apache WS-Security implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787738 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-03-01 15:28:20 -- 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 794725] Review Request: txw2 - Typed XML writer for 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=794725 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||agr...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|agr...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 480724] Review Request: ndjbdns - New djbdns, usable djbdns.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724 --- Comment #56 from pjp 2012-03-01 15:50:25 EST --- (In reply to comment #55) > Although not a blocker, I strongly urge you to consider renaming filepaths > with > the project name. /etc/ndjbdns instead of /etc/djbdns for instance to avoid > confusion with the original project. Yep done. Please see SPEC: http://pjp.dgplug.org/djbdns/ndjbdns.spec SRPM: http://pjp.dgplug.org/djbdns/ndjbdns-1.05.4-6.fc16.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3844111 Thanks so much! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798681] Review Request: python-pyotp - Python One Time Password library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798681 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi 2012-03-01 16:09:36 EST --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (BSD) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 7c45ca9a13f863caa1e8146e07d2b8b2 pyotp-1.3.1.tar.gz 7c45ca9a13f863caa1e8146e07d2b8b2 pyotp-1.3.1.tar.gz.orig OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. See below - Package has a correct %clean section. See below - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) OK - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. You may need to add %clean and buildroot for EPEL branches. They are of course not required for Fedora anymore. 2. The PKG-INFO says: License: UNKNOWN Might ask upstream to fix that. I see no blockers here, so this package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 723752] Review Request: lrslib - Reverse search for vertex enumeration/convex hull 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=723752 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Jerry James 2012-03-01 16:45:39 EST --- Thanks for the review, Doug. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: lrslib Short Description: Reverse search for vertex enumeration/convex hull problems Owners: jjames 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 790172] Review Request: jinput - Java Game Controller API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790172 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jerry James 2012-03-01 16:48:18 EST --- Thank you for the review, Andrew. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jinput Short Description: Java Game Controller API Owners: jjames 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 673788] Rename Request: mingw32-gcc -> mingw-gcc - GCC Cross-compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673788 Bug 673788 depends on bug 673784, which changed state. Bug 673784 Summary: Rename Request: mingw32-filesystem -> mingw-filesystem - Cross compiler base filesystem and environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673784 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #6 from Erik van Pienbroek 2012-03-01 18:38:37 EST --- Updated Spec URL: http://svn.openftd.org/svn/fedora_cross/mingw-gcc/mingw-gcc.spec Updated SRPM URL: http://build1.openftd.org/fedora-cross/src/mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.6.20120224.fc16.src.rpm Changes: - Merged recent changed from the mingw32-gcc package - Improved summary of various packages - Dropped the empty mingw32-libquadmath package - Dropped the use of the %configure macro as it was causing too much unwanted side-effects -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713313] Review Request: msktutil - Program for interoperability with Active Directory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=713313 --- Comment #34 from Ken Dreyer 2012-03-01 19:00:49 EST --- Update: I've obtained commit access to the upstream repository and pushed all my patches there. I've also tagged 0.4.1 and released it at a new location, https://code.google.com/p/msktutil . I've been testing 0.4.1 at work for a while now and I'll get an updated .spec up here soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783268] Review Request: goffice08 - Goffice support libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783268 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 19:59:30 EST --- Package goffice08-0.8.17-4.fc17, gnucash-2.4.10-1.fc17, ktoblzcheck-1.37-1.fc17: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing goffice08-0.8.17-4.fc17 gnucash-2.4.10-1.fc17 ktoblzcheck-1.37-1.fc17' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-2822/gnucash-2.4.10-1.fc17,goffice08-0.8.17-4.fc17,ktoblzcheck-1.37-1.fc17 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783849] Review Request: ktoblzcheck - A library to check account numbers and bank codes of German banks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783849 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 19:59:35 EST --- Package goffice08-0.8.17-4.fc17, gnucash-2.4.10-1.fc17, ktoblzcheck-1.37-1.fc17: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing goffice08-0.8.17-4.fc17 gnucash-2.4.10-1.fc17 ktoblzcheck-1.37-1.fc17' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-2822/gnucash-2.4.10-1.fc17,goffice08-0.8.17-4.fc17,ktoblzcheck-1.37-1.fc17 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794725] Review Request: txw2 - Typed XML writer for 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=794725
Andy Grimm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Andy Grimm 2012-03-01 20:00:19 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
txw2.src: W: invalid-url Source0: txw2-20110809.tar.gz
txw2-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs,
Java-docs, Avocados
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: 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.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: 5f324bbcf133eea42305c994f2c575b4
MD5SUM upstream package: 5f324bbcf133eea42305c994f2c575b4
[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
[-] 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, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[!] 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.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide
=== Issues ===
1. You've renamed the pom and jar files, and I'm not sure why. The artifact
names are txw2-project (the "master" pom for the build), txw2, and txwc2, and
the package name is txw2, so I don't think that renaming the jars to
"txw2-runtime" and "txw2-compiler" is correct.
=== Final Notes ===
In one of my recent reviews, a reviewer mentioned that when adding your own
patches to a build, it's a good idea to comment in the spec file about the
purpose of each patch. It's a minor thing, but one we should start paying
attention to.
Please fix (or explain) issue #1 and I'll approve the pac
[Bug 799171] New: Review Request: openvswitch - multi-layer software switch (userspace components)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: openvswitch - multi-layer software switch (userspace components) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799171 Summary: Review Request: openvswitch - multi-layer software switch (userspace components) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: chr...@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://chrisw.fedorapeople.org/openvswitch.spec SRPM URL: http://chrisw.fedorapeople.org/openvswitch-1.4.0-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: This review request is for the userspace pieces of openvswitch. The package has only spelling issues reported by rpmlint, and I believe complies w/ all the various review guidelines. The python-openvswitch subpackage does not require the core openvswitch package because the python modules and programs using them can run on a remote machine w/out running any openvswitch daemons locally. Thanks for reviewing my 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 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 changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc16 |sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc17 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 20:16:17 EST --- sparkleshare-0.8.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796074] Review Request: numad - NUMA user daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796074 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||numad-0.5-2.20120221git.fc1 ||7 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 20:22:16 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 20:22:16 EST --- numad-0.5-2.20120221git.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 673792] Review Request: mingw-crt - MinGW Windows cross-compiler 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=673792 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-antlr-2.7.7-8.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 20:23:52 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 20:23:52 EST --- mingw-antlr-2.7.7-8.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-2.fc17, mingw-ftplib-3.1-5.fc17, mingw-gdb-7.3-3.fc17, mingw-goocanvas2-2.0.1-3.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-4.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-plugins-base-0.10.35-3.fc17, mingw-gtk3-3.3.16-1.fc17, mingw-gtkmm30-3.2.0-4.fc17, mingw-gtksourceview3-3.2.0-4.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-icu-4.8.1.1-4.fc17, mingw-libjpeg-turbo-1.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-libtasn1-2.9-4.fc17, mingw-libvorbis-1.3.2-4.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-2.fc17, mingw-pkg-config-0.26-4.fc17, mingw-win-iconv-0.0.3-6.fc17, mingw-wxWidgets-2.8.12-9.fc17, mingw32-SDL-1.2.13-12.fc17, mingw32-SDL_image-1.2.12-2.fc17, mingw32-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-5.fc17, mingw32-atk-2.2.0-3.fc17, mingw32-atkmm-2.22.6-1.fc17, mingw32-binutils-2.22.52-1.fc17, mingw32-boost-1.48.0-4.fc17, mingw32-bzip2-1.0.5-11.fc17, mingw32-cairo-1.10.2-9.fc17, mingw32-cairomm-1.10.0-4.fc17, mingw32-celt051-0.5.1.3-6.fc17, mingw32-cppunit-1.12.1-7.fc17, mingw32-crossreport-8-1.fc17, mingw32-curl-7.20.1-5.fc17, mingw32-cxxtest-3.10.1-7.fc17, mingw32-dbus-1.4.6-3.fc17, mingw32-dirac-1.0.2-6.fc17, mingw32-dlfcn-0-0.11.r11.fc17, mingw32-enchant-1.6.0-3.fc17, mingw32-expat-2.0.1-9.fc17, mingw32-fontconfig-2.8.0-4.fc17, mingw32-freeglut-2.6.0-0.4.rc1.fc17, mingw32-freetype-2.4.8-2.fc17, mingw32-gcc-4.7.0-0.5.20120224.fc17, mingw32-gdbm-1.8.0-8.fc17, mingw32-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-3.fc17, mingw32-gettext-0.18.1.1-5.fc17, mingw32-glib-networking-2.31.16-1.fc17, mingw32-glib2-2.31.18-1.fc17, mingw32-glibmm24-2.31.2-3.fc17, mingw32-gnutls-2.12.14-4.fc17, mingw32-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-5.fc17, mingw32-gtk2-2.24.10-2.fc17, mingw32-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-5.fc17, mingw32-gtkmm24-2.24.2-4.fc17, mingw32-hunspell-1.3.2-3.fc17, mingw32-jasper-1.900.1-15.fc17, mingw32-libffi-3.0.9-4.fc17, mingw32-libgcrypt-1.4.4-7.fc17, mingw32-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.4.svn1664.fc17, mingw32-libglade2-2.6.4-11.fc17, mingw32-libglademm24-2.6.7-14.fc17, mingw32-libgnurx-2.5.1-9.fc17, mingw32-libgpg-error-1.6-16.fc17, mingw32-libidn-1.14-11.fc17, mingw32-libltdl-2.4-5.fc17, mingw32-libogg-1.1.4-5.fc17, mingw32-liboil-0.3.16-5.fc17, mingw32-libp11-0.2.8-3.fc17, mingw32-libpng-1.5.7-2.fc17, mingw32-libsigc++20-2.2.10-4.fc17, mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6-4.fc17, mingw32-libsoup-2.37.90-1.fc17, mingw32-libsqlite3x-20071018-14.fc17, mingw32-libssh2-1.1-8.fc17, mingw32-libtiff-3.9.5-4.fc17, mingw32-libvirt-0.9.10-2.fc17, mingw32-libxml++-2.34.2-4.fc17, mingw32-libxml2-2.7.8-4.fc17, mingw32-libxslt-1.1.26-6.fc17, mingw32-libzip-0.9-5.fc17, mingw32-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.3, mingw32-nsis-2.46-6.fc17, mingw32-nsiswrapper-9-2.fc17, mingw32-openjpeg-1.3-8.fc17, mingw32-opensc-0.12.2-3.fc17, mingw32-openssl-1.0.0d-3.fc17, mingw32-pango-1.29.5-2.fc17, mingw32-pangomm-2.28.3-4.fc17, mingw32-pcre-8.10-6.fc17, mingw32-pdcurses-3.4-10.fc17, mingw32-pixman-0.24.4-1.fc17, mingw32-plotmm-0.1.2-12.fc17, mingw32-portablexdr-4.9.1-5.fc17, mingw32-proj-4.6.1-7.fc17, mingw32-pthreads-2.8.0-17.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw32-qpid-cpp-0.14-1.fc17, mingw32-qt-4.8.0-5.fc17, mingw32-qt-qmake-4.8.0-4.fc17, mingw32-qwt-5.2.1-5.fc17, mingw32-readline-5.2-10.fc17, mingw32-sigar-1.6.5-0.7.git58097d9.fc17, mingw32-spice-protocol-0.8.0-3.fc17, mingw32-sqlite-3.7.9-2.fc17, mingw32-srvany-1.0-7.fc17, mingw32-tcl-8.5.11-2.fc17, mingw32-termcap-1.3.1-11.fc17, mingw32-tk-8.5.9-4.fc17, mingw32-webkitgtk-1.7.5-5.fc17, mingw32-wpcap-4.1.final2-5.fc17, mingw32-xerces-c-3.1.1-3.fc17, mingw32-zfstream-20041202-11.fc17, mingw32-zlib-1.2.5-8.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 673790] Review Request: mingw-headers - MinGW Windows cross-compiler header files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673790 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-antlr-2.7.7-8.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 20:24:02 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 20:24:02 EST --- mingw-antlr-2.7.7-8.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-2.fc17, mingw-ftplib-3.1-5.fc17, mingw-gdb-7.3-3.fc17, mingw-goocanvas2-2.0.1-3.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-4.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-plugins-base-0.10.35-3.fc17, mingw-gtk3-3.3.16-1.fc17, mingw-gtkmm30-3.2.0-4.fc17, mingw-gtksourceview3-3.2.0-4.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.4.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-icu-4.8.1.1-4.fc17, mingw-libjpeg-turbo-1.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-libtasn1-2.9-4.fc17, mingw-libvorbis-1.3.2-4.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-2.fc17, mingw-pkg-config-0.26-4.fc17, mingw-win-iconv-0.0.3-6.fc17, mingw-wxWidgets-2.8.12-9.fc17, mingw32-SDL-1.2.13-12.fc17, mingw32-SDL_image-1.2.12-2.fc17, mingw32-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-5.fc17, mingw32-atk-2.2.0-3.fc17, mingw32-atkmm-2.22.6-1.fc17, mingw32-binutils-2.22.52-1.fc17, mingw32-boost-1.48.0-4.fc17, mingw32-bzip2-1.0.5-11.fc17, mingw32-cairo-1.10.2-9.fc17, mingw32-cairomm-1.10.0-4.fc17, mingw32-celt051-0.5.1.3-6.fc17, mingw32-cppunit-1.12.1-7.fc17, mingw32-crossreport-8-1.fc17, mingw32-curl-7.20.1-5.fc17, mingw32-cxxtest-3.10.1-7.fc17, mingw32-dbus-1.4.6-3.fc17, mingw32-dirac-1.0.2-6.fc17, mingw32-dlfcn-0-0.11.r11.fc17, mingw32-enchant-1.6.0-3.fc17, mingw32-expat-2.0.1-9.fc17, mingw32-fontconfig-2.8.0-4.fc17, mingw32-freeglut-2.6.0-0.4.rc1.fc17, mingw32-freetype-2.4.8-2.fc17, mingw32-gcc-4.7.0-0.5.20120224.fc17, mingw32-gdbm-1.8.0-8.fc17, mingw32-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-3.fc17, mingw32-gettext-0.18.1.1-5.fc17, mingw32-glib-networking-2.31.16-1.fc17, mingw32-glib2-2.31.18-1.fc17, mingw32-glibmm24-2.31.2-3.fc17, mingw32-gnutls-2.12.14-4.fc17, mingw32-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-5.fc17, mingw32-gtk2-2.24.10-2.fc17, mingw32-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-5.fc17, mingw32-gtkmm24-2.24.2-4.fc17, mingw32-hunspell-1.3.2-3.fc17, mingw32-jasper-1.900.1-15.fc17, mingw32-libffi-3.0.9-4.fc17, mingw32-libgcrypt-1.4.4-7.fc17, mingw32-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.4.svn1664.fc17, mingw32-libglade2-2.6.4-11.fc17, mingw32-libglademm24-2.6.7-14.fc17, mingw32-libgnurx-2.5.1-9.fc17, mingw32-libgpg-error-1.6-16.fc17, mingw32-libidn-1.14-11.fc17, mingw32-libltdl-2.4-5.fc17, mingw32-libogg-1.1.4-5.fc17, mingw32-liboil-0.3.16-5.fc17, mingw32-libp11-0.2.8-3.fc17, mingw32-libpng-1.5.7-2.fc17, mingw32-libsigc++20-2.2.10-4.fc17, mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6-4.fc17, mingw32-libsoup-2.37.90-1.fc17, mingw32-libsqlite3x-20071018-14.fc17, mingw32-libssh2-1.1-8.fc17, mingw32-libtiff-3.9.5-4.fc17, mingw32-libvirt-0.9.10-2.fc17, mingw32-libxml++-2.34.2-4.fc17, mingw32-libxml2-2.7.8-4.fc17, mingw32-libxslt-1.1.26-6.fc17, mingw32-libzip-0.9-5.fc17, mingw32-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.3, mingw32-nsis-2.46-6.fc17, mingw32-nsiswrapper-9-2.fc17, mingw32-openjpeg-1.3-8.fc17, mingw32-opensc-0.12.2-3.fc17, mingw32-openssl-1.0.0d-3.fc17, mingw32-pango-1.29.5-2.fc17, mingw32-pangomm-2.28.3-4.fc17, mingw32-pcre-8.10-6.fc17, mingw32-pdcurses-3.4-10.fc17, mingw32-pixman-0.24.4-1.fc17, mingw32-plotmm-0.1.2-12.fc17, mingw32-portablexdr-4.9.1-5.fc17, mingw32-proj-4.6.1-7.fc17, mingw32-pthreads-2.8.0-17.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw32-qpid-cpp-0.14-1.fc17, mingw32-qt-4.8.0-5.fc17, mingw32-qt-qmake-4.8.0-4.fc17, mingw32-qwt-5.2.1-5.fc17, mingw32-readline-5.2-10.fc17, mingw32-sigar-1.6.5-0.7.git58097d9.fc17, mingw32-spice-protocol-0.8.0-3.fc17, mingw32-sqlite-3.7.9-2.fc17, mingw32-srvany-1.0-7.fc17, mingw32-tcl-8.5.11-2.fc17, mingw32-termcap-1.3.1-11.fc17, mingw32-tk-8.5.9-4.fc17, mingw32-webkitgtk-1.7.5-5.fc17, mingw32-wpcap-4.1.final2-5.fc17, mingw32-xerces-c-3.1.1-3.fc17, mingw32-zfstream-20041202-11.fc17, mingw32-zlib-1.2.5-8.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796824] Review Request: memchan - In-memory channels for Tcl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796824 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||memchan-2.3-1.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-01 20:30:14 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-01 20:30:14 EST --- memchan-2.3-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790256] Review Request: ha-jdbc - High-availability JDBC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790256 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-01 21:21:08 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 784759] Review Request: ghc-fast-logger - Fast logging library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784759 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-01 21:19:43 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 783837] Review Request: php-pecl-http - Extended HTTP support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783837 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-01 21:19:03 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 790172] Review Request: jinput - Java Game Controller API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790172 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-01 21:20:30 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 723752] Review Request: lrslib - Reverse search for vertex enumeration/convex hull 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=723752 --- Comment #16 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-01 21:18:40 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 664221] Review Request: ghc-cautious-file - Provides ways to write a file cautiously
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664221 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-01 21:18:08 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 784769] Review Request: ghc-transformers-base - Haskell monad transformer lifting library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784769 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-01 21:20:03 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
