[Bug 800091] Review Request: jsr-250 - Common Annotations for the JavaTM Platform.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800091 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800091] Review Request: jsr-250 - Common Annotations for the JavaTM Platform.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800091 Alexander Kurtakov 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 737293] Review Request: python-django - A high-level Python Web framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737293
--- Comment #6 from Matthias Runge 2012-03-09
02:50:34 EST ---
OK, I/one should add
Provides: django = %{version}-%{release}
and also additional provides/obsoletes to -doc subpackage.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801695] New: Review Request: stax-ex - StAX API extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: stax-ex - StAX API extensions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801695 Summary: Review Request: stax-ex - StAX API extensions Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: juan.hernan...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 652183 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://jhernand.fedorapeople.org/rpms/stax-ex/1.4-2/stax-ex.spec SRPM URL: http://jhernand.fedorapeople.org/rpms/stax-ex/1.4-2/stax-ex-1.4-2.fc17.src.rpm Description: StAX API extensions. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3871684 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796201] Review Request: glassfish-jaxb - JAXB Reference 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=796201 Juan Hernández changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||801695 --- Comment #4 from Juan Hernández 2012-03-09 02:46:11 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > This package requires stax-ex, which does not appear to be posted for review > anywhere. It is in marek's queue here: > > http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/jboss_as/queue/2012-01-21 Thanks for catching this. Submited stax-ex for review, see bug 801695. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801695] Review Request: stax-ex - StAX API extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801695 Juan Hernández changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||796201 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797740] Review Request: z80asm - Assembler for Z80 microprocessor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797740 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-09 02:44:10 EST --- z80asm-1.8-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/z80asm-1.8-2.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 719854] Review Request: rubygem-xmlparser-0.6.81-1 - Ruby bindings to the Expat XML parsing 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=719854 --- Comment #46 from Ulrich Schwickerath 2012-03-09 02:40:15 EST --- The build for el6 currently fails because rubygem-mkrf is missing for el6. Can that be included in el6 ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737293] Review Request: python-django - A high-level Python Web framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737293
--- Comment #5 from Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda 2012-03-09
02:25:09 EST ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I took the freedom to create some new SRPM/SPEC to make some progress.
>
> SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django.spec
> SRPM: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-1.3.1-5.fc16.src.rpm
>
> Dear django-maintainers: If you're short in time, I'll be glad to help out.
> Question is: how?
>
> Matthias
- As proposed in the fpc ticket [1], we should also have Provides: django =
%{version}-%{release} (with the lowercase d) for better usability via yum.
- I would still love to see some unit tests running in the check section. Is
there a way to do that?
- Otherwise the package looks good.
I agree with Matthias, that there would be lots of people willing to help with
maintenance of Django. Michel, would you possibly let Matthias finish the
review and then make the SCM request yourself, accepting Matthias as
comaintainer (personally, I would also love to comaintain :))? This is really
blocking the whole "Django rename" effort [2], so it would be nice if we could
get it moving.
Thank you very much!
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/146
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bkabrda/Django_rename
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 225759] Merge Review: fontconfig
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225759 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ta...@redhat.com --- Comment #18 from Parag AN(पराग) 2012-03-09 02:25:00 EST --- Matthias, I am not sure if anyone is actively working on Fedora fontconfig package maintenance. We have got new fontconfig project leader(Akira Tagoh) in upstream. Soon a new release of fontconfig will be available. If its ok with you can this package be reassigned to Akira? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801439] Review Request: rubygem-netrc - Library to read and write netrc 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=801439 --- Comment #2 from Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda 2012-03-09 02:10:38 EST --- - rpmlint shows this error: "rubygem-netrc-doc.noarch: E: non-readable /usr/share/gems/gems/netrc-0.7/data/sample.netrc 0600L", I believe that the right permissions should be 644. - Otherwise the package looks fine, but we will have to wait for the author to state the license before it gets 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 801439] Review Request: rubygem-netrc - Library to read and write netrc 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=801439 Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||bkab...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda 2012-03-09 01:59:02 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 801439] Review Request: rubygem-netrc - Library to read and write netrc 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=801439 Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bkab...@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 798248] Review Request: rubygem-ruby-dbus - Ruby module for interaction with D-Bus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798248
--- Comment #4 from Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda 2012-03-09
01:53:53 EST ---
- So, I have created a patch that unbundles the libraries and upstream has
accepted it [1], so this solves the bundling issue.
- As for the provides/obsoletes of virtual provides, I have discussed with two
proven packagers and they agreed, that the proper way is to obsolete and
provide both the package name and its virtual provide (which was ruby(dbus) =
%{version}). So the proper tags for this package should be (already in the
updated spec):
Provides: ruby(dbus) = %{version}
Provides: ruby-dbus = %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: ruby(dbus) < 0.3.0
Obsoletes: ruby-dbus < 0.3.0-5
SPEC: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/ruby-dbus/rubygem-ruby-dbus.spec
SRPM:
http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/ruby-dbus/rubygem-ruby-dbus-0.7.0-2.fc17.src.rpm
Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3871637
[1] https://github.com/mvidner/ruby-dbus/pull/18
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801680] New: Review Request: picketbox - Security framework for Java Applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: picketbox - Security framework for Java Applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801680 Summary: Review Request: picketbox - Security framework for Java Applications Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ricardo.argue...@gmail.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://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/picketbox/1/picketbox.spec SRPM URL: http://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/picketbox/1/picketbox-4.0.6-2.fc17.src.rpm Description: Security framework for Java Applications -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801651] Review Request: jboss-jacc-1.4-api - JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 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=801651 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||801680 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801680] Review Request: picketbox - Security framework for Java Applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801680 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||801614, 801651, 800756 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801614] Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API 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=801614 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||801680 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800756] Review Request: infinispan - Data grid platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800756 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||801680 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797165] Review Request: jboss-el-2.2-api - Expression Language 2.2 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=797165 Richard Fontana changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rfont...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Richard Fontana 2012-03-09 01:14:20 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > License cleanup pull request: > https://github.com/jboss/jboss-el-api_spec/pull/1 > > I think proper license header after it gets pushed will be: "CDDL or GPLv2 > with > exceptions or ASL 2.0" Not sure if the upstream cleanup was necessary here, but it seems harmless. I would simply use "CDDL" here for the license tag as in the similarly odd case of BZ# 730232 because of the presence of incorporated Apache code. (Were there no such Apache notices "CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions" would otherwise make sense.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730232] Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.0-api - Java Servlet 3.0 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=730232 Richard Fontana changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)| --- Comment #5 from Richard Fontana 2012-03-09 00:47:23 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > According to the license headers this is not LGPLv2+ but every file is mix of > GPLv2(only) and ASL 2.0 which are known to be incompatible. I would wait for > legal but according to me this cannot go into Fedora. While this is certainly odd, I see various ways of conceptually resolving any supposed license incompatibility. The easiest may be to assume that all code is CDDL. It is significant that the nominal copyright holder clearly saw no problem with incorporating Apache License 2.0 code into files licensed under CDDL/GPLv2. Lifting FE-Legal. Marek, the only real issue here is that the License tag should be changed from "LGPLv2+" to "CDDL". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801651] New: Review Request: jboss-jacc-1.4-api - JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: jboss-jacc-1.4-api - JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801651 Summary: Review Request: jboss-jacc-1.4-api - JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ricardo.argue...@gmail.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://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-jacc-1.4-api/1/jboss-jacc-1.4-api.spec SRPM URL: http://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-jacc-1.4-api/1/jboss-jacc-1.4-api-1.0.1-2.fc17.src.rpm Description: JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 API -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801651] Review Request: jboss-jacc-1.4-api - JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 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=801651 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||730232 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730232] Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.0-api - Java Servlet 3.0 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=730232 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||801651 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-fast-logger-0.0.2-1.fc1 ||7 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-08 23:53:19 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:53:19 EST --- ghc-fast-logger-0.0.2-1.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 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-transformers-base-0.4.1 ||-1.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-08 23:56:22 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:56:22 EST --- ghc-transformers-base-0.4.1-1.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 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||lrslib-4.2c-3.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-08 23:51:52 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:51:52 EST --- lrslib-4.2c-3.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 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||jinput-2.0.6-1.20110801svn. ||fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-08 23:52:55 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:52:55 EST --- jinput-2.0.6-1.20110801svn.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 797370] Review Request: python-ssh - A Python SSH2 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=797370 --- Comment #10 from Bobby Powers 2012-03-08 23:38:23 EST --- testing on f17, I should add -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797370] Review Request: python-ssh - A Python SSH2 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=797370 Bobby Powers changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bo...@laptop.org --- Comment #9 from Bobby Powers 2012-03-08 23:38:08 EST --- this is great! I'm using this with a fabric-1.4 rpm with great success. Let me know if you want the git diff, although its fairly trivial with python-ssh being packaged. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797740] Review Request: z80asm - Assembler for Z80 microprocessor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797740 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:18:00 EST --- z80asm-1.8-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/z80asm-1.8-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798506] Review Request: ghc-cabal-file-th - Template Haskell expressions for reading cabal 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=798506 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:12:11 EST --- ghc-cabal-file-th-0.2.2-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-cabal-file-th-0.2.2-1.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797740] Review Request: z80asm - Assembler for Z80 microprocessor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797740 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798506] Review Request: ghc-cabal-file-th - Template Haskell expressions for reading cabal 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=798506 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:09:06 EST --- ghc-cabal-file-th-0.2.2-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-cabal-file-th-0.2.2-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798506] Review Request: ghc-cabal-file-th - Template Haskell expressions for reading cabal 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=798506 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:09:55 EST --- ghc-cabal-file-th-0.2.2-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-cabal-file-th-0.2.2-1.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798506] Review Request: ghc-cabal-file-th - Template Haskell expressions for reading cabal 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=798506 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797740] Review Request: z80asm - Assembler for Z80 microprocessor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797740 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 23:11:08 EST --- z80asm-1.8-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/z80asm-1.8-1.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801614] Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API 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=801614 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||730227 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730227] Review Request: jboss-transaction-1.1-api - Transaction 1.1 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=730227 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||801614 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 551763] Review Request: lua-sec - Lua binding for OpenSSL 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=551763 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 20:07:13 EST --- lua-sec-0.4.1-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800753] Review Request: rhq-plugin-annotations - Annotations to help generate RHQ plugin descriptors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800753 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 20:06:50 EST --- rhq-plugin-annotations-3.0.4-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800746] Review Request: jboss-naming - The JBoss JNDI name server 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=800746 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 20:06:56 EST --- jboss-naming-5.0.6-0.2.CR1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801614] New: Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API classes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801614 Summary: Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API classes Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ricardo.argue...@gmail.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://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-connector-1.6-api/1/jboss-connector-1.6-api.spec SRPM URL: http://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-connector-1.6-api/1/jboss-connector-1.6-api-1.0.0-2.fc17.src.rpm Description: Connector Architecture 1.6 API -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930 --- Comment #13 from Martin Erik Werner 2012-03-08 19:42:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) > You need a %doc entry in the %files section of the main package. Read this: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing > Ah, right, but I will then need to duplicate most of the license info in the -data package since it shouldn't depend on the engine package, right? > In the license.txt upstream has been very clear about the source and the > content, your comments before your all license source is enough as long as you > make sure the sub-packages require the main package. If this is enough, I'd be happy to remove the all-licenses file, however, I get the impression that (paraphrasing license.txt) "There are a whole bunch of individual licenses (some custom-written), dig through the subfolders in order to find them" ..is not really good enough, or is it? Note that there are a few home-made licenses there as well, my comments in the spec file only cover those which have a known shortname in Fedora. > > And seriously, lose all of the references to debian for your patches unless > you > are referring to a specific bug report. The why is much more important than > the > where. Better yet, refer to upstreams response to said bug report (I > understand > the debian maintainer is upstream). Whatever is going to help maintain the > package longterm The Debian maintainer is me, who is semi-upstream (doc, etc.) as well. I discussed those changes only via IRC (with main RE devs), so I'm afraid there's no response-reference for them. I tried to add some my "why" in the patch comments, hope it is reasonable. I've also tweaked the patch file headers to be a bit more Fedora-centric spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/5/redeclipse.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 796201] Review Request: glassfish-jaxb - JAXB Reference 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=796201 --- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm 2012-03-08 19:04:26 EST --- This package requires stax-ex, which does not appear to be posted for review anywhere. It is in marek's queue here: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/jboss_as/queue/2012-01-21/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737286] Review Request: salt - A parallel remote execution system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737286 --- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:39:28 EST --- salt-0.9.7-2.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/salt-0.9.7-2.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 737286] Review Request: salt - A parallel remote execution system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737286 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:40:31 EST --- salt-0.9.7-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/salt-0.9.7-2.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 795605] Review Request: perl-Tk-ToolBar - Toolbar widget for Perl/Tk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795605 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Tk-ToolBar-0.10-3.fc17 |perl-Tk-ToolBar-0.10-3.fc16 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:27:42 EST --- perl-Tk-ToolBar-0.10-3.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 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930 --- Comment #12 from Brendan Jones 2012-03-08 16:25:08 EST --- You need a %doc entry in the %files section of the main package. Read this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing In the license.txt upstream has been very clear about the source and the content, your comments before your all license source is enough as long as you make sure the sub-packages require the main package. And seriously, lose all of the references to debian for your patches unless you are referring to a specific bug report. The why is much more important than the where. Better yet, refer to upstreams response to said bug report (I understand the debian maintainer is upstream). Whatever is going to help maintain the package longterm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772987] Review Request: globus-gram-job-manager-condor - Globus Toolkit - Condor Job Manager 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=772987 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|globus-gram-job-manager-con |globus-gram-job-manager-con |dor-1.0-2.fc15 |dor-1.0-2.fc16 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:23:40 EST --- globus-gram-job-manager-condor-1.0-2.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 772987] Review Request: globus-gram-job-manager-condor - Globus Toolkit - Condor Job Manager 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=772987 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|globus-gram-job-manager-con |globus-gram-job-manager-con |dor-1.0-2.fc17 |dor-1.0-2.fc15 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:22:48 EST --- globus-gram-job-manager-condor-1.0-2.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 787459] Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787459 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme |drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme |-2.2-1.fc17 |-2.2-1.fc16 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:21:22 EST --- drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.2-1.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 797370] Review Request: python-ssh - A Python SSH2 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=797370 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:24:37 EST --- python-ssh-1.7.13-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787459] Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787459 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme |drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme |-2.2-1.fc16 |-2.2-1.fc15 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 16:21:33 EST --- drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.2-1.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 800890] Review Request: mojarra - JSF Reference 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=800890 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-08 16:20:23 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 800738] Review Request: avro - Apache Avro is a data serialization system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800738 Bug 800738 depends on bug 800733, which changed state. Bug 800733 Summary: Review Request: snappy-java - Snappy for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800733 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ON_QA |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800733] Review Request: snappy-java - Snappy 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=800733 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-03-08 16:03:34 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 786676] Review Request: picketbox-xacml - PicketBox XACML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786676 Ricardo Arguello changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-03-08 16:03:22 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800753] Review Request: rhq-plugin-annotations - Annotations to help generate RHQ plugin descriptors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800753 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 15:56:16 EST --- rhq-plugin-annotations-3.0.4-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rhq-plugin-annotations-3.0.4-2.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 760594] Review Request: simcrs - C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760594 --- Comment #4 from Denis Arnaud 2012-03-08 15:54:15 EST --- Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/simcrs/simcrs.spec SRPM URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/simcrs/simcrs-0.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Sorry, the source tar-ball (simcrs-0.1.1.tar.bz2) was not the latest one in the previous source RPM. SourceForge has got the latest one. There were just a few minor differences, which were mainly corrections of typos in the documentation. Therefore, I have just rebuilt the source RPM with the latest source tar-ball, and refreshed the above-mentioned files. As for EPEL, yes I intend to maintain that package for EPEL 5. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800753] Review Request: rhq-plugin-annotations - Annotations to help generate RHQ plugin descriptors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800753 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800890] Review Request: mojarra - JSF Reference 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=800890 --- Comment #3 from Juan Hernández 2012-03-08 15:36:14 EST --- I made a mistake in the SCM request, it should be: New Package SCM Request === Package Name: mojarra Short Description: JSF Reference Implementation Owners: jhernand Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722713] Review Request: pyace - Optimal route search in a complete graph
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722713
--- Comment #18 from Volker Fröhlich 2012-03-08 15:25:54 EST
---
README: "pyACE is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
...
http://code.google.com/p/curvatura/
"
Spec file: GPLv2+
http://curvatura.googlecode.com/
pyace.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.2 ['3.0-2.fc16', '3.0-2']
The examples should be labeled documentation. It is common to put the
documentation first in the files section.
The manpage should rather be %{_mandir}/man1/pyace.1*
Please use the name macro consistently, meaning don't switch between %{name}
and pyace.
I think it'd be better to have
%{python_sitelib}/%{name}-%{version}-py*.egg-info instead of a specific Python
version.
I'd write .py* instead of .py, .pyc and .pyo, but it's not a blocker.
There's a lot of slack in the tarball, by the way:
- rpms and tarball in src
- .git stuff
Take a look at http://linux.die.net/man/1/git-archive for best practice on how
to release a tarball with Git.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800890] Review Request: mojarra - JSF Reference 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=800890 Juan Hernández changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Juan Hernández 2012-03-08 15:17:33 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: mojarra Short Description: JSF Reference Implementation Owners: asaf Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800890] Review Request: mojarra - JSF Reference 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=800890
Marek Goldmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) |
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgold...@redhat.com
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Marek Goldmann 2012-03-08 15:06:05
EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint SPECS/mojarra.spec
SPECS/mojarra.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: mojarra-2.1.7.tgz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint SRPMS/mojarra-2.1.7-2.fc17.src.rpm
mojarra.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
mojarra.src: W: file-size-mismatch jsf-api-2.1.7.pom = 12321,
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/sun/faces/jsf-api/2.1.7/jsf-api-2.1.7.pom =
12323
mojarra.src: W: invalid-url Source0: mojarra-2.1.7.tgz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
See #1.
[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 or 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: f397cefdd5d6345c1b91a46449db39e0
MD5SUM upstream package: e9347ea454d68e83ea501cf622cd9859
SVN export, OK.
[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.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven.local.depmap.file=*" explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3870543
=== Issues ===
1. Could you please r
[Bug 720813] Review Request: python-strainer - Tools to allow developers to cleanup web serialization objects (HTML, JSON, XHTML)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720813 --- Comment #6 from Luke Macken 2012-03-08 15:00:20 EST --- Spec URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-strainer.spec SRPM URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-strainer-0.1.4-2.fc16.src.rpm * Thu Mar 08 2012 Luke Macken - 0.1.4-2 - Remove the shebang from xhtmlify.py - Remove unnecessary EPEL conditionals -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769919] Review Request: hydra - Very fast network log-on cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769919 --- Comment #12 from Athmane Madjoudj 2012-03-08 14:48:04 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) > Hm, I don't feel very happy about having to install PostgreSQL and Firebird > libraries, just to be able to use this program for SVN, for instance. > It's a multi-protocols brute-forcer, there's a similar package in fedora 'medusa', packaged in the same way even if it has a modular architecture (.so for each service, but the package depends on libssh2, postgresql libs etc...), hydra is on binary :/. > There is at least some GPLv3+ code. Have you dug through the code? It is quite > a mixture, but I assume GPLv3+ as the overall license could be fine. > It seems to be 'GPLv3 with exceptions' (because of OpenSSL), I checked with Gentoo (GPL-3) and Debian (GPL-3.0+ with OpenSSL exception) > Please preserve the timestamps for the manpages and the icon (-p). > Fixed in -4 > What is the group "X-Red-Hat-Base" for? > Removed in -4, > There are several format warnings when you compile the code. Try to fix them > and submit it to upstream. > I noticed them when I enabled CFLAGS, I'm using this build at work and it seems very stable (heavily tested with SSH and FTP), but I'll try to help upstream to fix them (along with mysql and CFLAGS support) > On my F16 64 bit system a build with rpmbuild fails for some reason, while it > works with Mock. Maybe you have mysql-devel, can attach the errors SPEC: http://athmane.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/hydra.spec SRPM: http://athmane.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/hydra-7.2-4.fc16.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3870495 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930
--- Comment #11 from Martin Erik Werner 2012-03-08
14:45:43 EST ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> (...)
> Apologies, I stand corrected, you can include a file in the %doc section which
> outlines the breakdown, but you don't need to pull in a debian tarball. Just
> copy the breakdown into a new file, removing debian references, and include it
> as a Source and move it into %doc in our install section.
Done
> (..)
> You should be using CXXFLAGS=%{optflags}
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags
>
> IF this still results in the use of non standard compiler flags, you may need
> to sed/patch the makefile in you %prep section.
Done
Updated both:
spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/4/redeclipse.spec
srpm URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/4/redeclipse-1.2-1.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 720813] Review Request: python-strainer - Tools to allow developers to cleanup web serialization objects (HTML, JSON, XHTML)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720813 Volker Fröhlich changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|volke...@gmx.at Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722713] Review Request: pyace - Optimal route search in a complete graph
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722713 --- Comment #17 from Mauricio Cleveland 2012-03-08 14:45:09 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) > SRPM and Spec file are enough, don't submit the final package. http://curvatura.googlecode.com/files/pyace-3.0-2.fc16.src.rpm http://curvatura.googlecode.com/files/pyace.spec > > The spec file must be called the same as package, as rpmlint will tell you. > [cleve@Quasard src]$ rpmlint pyace-3.0-2.fc16.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [cleve@Quasard curvatura]$ rpmlint pyace.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. > Please submit the files in a way they can be easily downloaded. Right now, > these are not direct links. You can neither install with rpm -ivh this way, > nor > will fedora-review work. Sorry, my mistake. > > defattr is no longer necessary. Ok. > > Please handle the locales as described in the packaging guidelines. And Ok. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720813] Review Request: python-strainer - Tools to allow developers to cleanup web serialization objects (HTML, JSON, XHTML)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720813 --- Comment #5 from Volker Fröhlich 2012-03-08 14:41:17 EST --- You don't need to put conditionals around the EPEL 5 specific elements, they don't do any harm. They're just not necessary if you only packaged for EPEL 6 and Fedora only. Please, whenever you post new specfiles and SRPMs, bump the release number and leave a meaningful changelog entry in the spec file. It makes work easier for the reviewer. Removing the shebang from xhtmlify.py should fix the warning about it not being executable as well. The files section could be more explicit, but actually everything is fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769919] Review Request: hydra - Very fast network log-on cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769919 --- Comment #11 from Volker Fröhlich 2012-03-08 13:56:12 EST --- Hm, I don't feel very happy about having to install PostgreSQL and Firebird libraries, just to be able to use this program for SVN, for instance. There is at least some GPLv3+ code. Have you dug through the code? It is quite a mixture, but I assume GPLv3+ as the overall license could be fine. Please preserve the timestamps for the manpages and the icon (-p). What is the group "X-Red-Hat-Base" for? There are several format warnings when you compile the code. Try to fix them and submit it to upstream. On my F16 64 bit system a build with rpmbuild fails for some reason, while it works with Mock. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787020] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic 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=787020 --- Comment #4 from Bill McGonigle 2012-03-08 13:54:51 EST --- Looks like it's just a typo in the URL: http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.3-0/trafficserver-3.0.3-0.el6.src.rpm works. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785727] Review Request: ocaml-camlimages - OCaml image processing 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=785727 Hans de Goede changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||hdego...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hdego...@redhat.com --- Comment #4 from Hans de Goede 2012-03-08 13:51:42 EST --- I'll be reviewing this tonight, assigning to me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930 Martin Erik Werner changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|799778 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930 Martin Erik Werner changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||739313 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784603] Review Request: python-messaging - abstraction of a "message"
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784603 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-messaging-0.5-2.fc17 |python-messaging-0.5-2.el6 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:26:43 EST --- python-messaging-0.5-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784603] Review Request: python-messaging - abstraction of a "message"
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784603 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-messaging-0.5-2.el6 |python-messaging-0.5-2.el5 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:27:10 EST --- python-messaging-0.5-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 784613] Review Request: python-auth-credential - abstraction of a credential
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784613 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-auth-credential-0.5- |python-auth-credential-0.5- |2.el6 |2.el5 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:27:23 EST --- python-auth-credential-0.5-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 637491] Review Request: perl-Params-Classify - Argument type classification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637491 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:27:01 EST --- perl-Params-Classify-0.013-5.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 784613] Review Request: python-auth-credential - abstraction of a credential
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784613 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-auth-credential-0.5- |python-auth-credential-0.5- |2.fc17 |2.el6 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:26:32 EST --- python-auth-credential-0.5-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 637491] Review Request: perl-Params-Classify - Argument type classification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637491 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:26:18 EST --- perl-Params-Classify-0.013-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737286] Review Request: salt - A parallel remote execution system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737286 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|salt-0.9.6-2.el6|salt-0.9.6-2.el5 --- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:26:04 EST --- salt-0.9.6-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 551763] Review Request: lua-sec - Lua binding for OpenSSL 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=551763 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 551763] Review Request: lua-sec - Lua binding for OpenSSL 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=551763 --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:16:05 EST --- lua-sec-0.4.1-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-sec-0.4.1-2.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 551763] Review Request: lua-sec - Lua binding for OpenSSL 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=551763 --- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:15:22 EST --- lua-sec-0.4.1-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-sec-0.4.1-2.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 551763] Review Request: lua-sec - Lua binding for OpenSSL 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=551763 --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:15:10 EST --- lua-sec-0.4.1-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-sec-0.4.1-2.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 551763] Review Request: lua-sec - Lua binding for OpenSSL 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=551763 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 12:15:33 EST --- lua-sec-0.4.1-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-sec-0.4.1-2.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 750394] Review Request: dmtcp - Checkpoint/Restart functionality for Linux processes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=750394 --- Comment #23 from Orion Poplawski 2012-03-08 11:35:11 EST --- Kapil - You need to install the rpms and then run rpmlint on the installed package names. There are some tests rpmlint can only perform on installed packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787020] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic 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=787020 Kalpa Welivitigoda changed: What|Removed |Added CC||callka...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Kalpa Welivitigoda 2012-03-08 11:33:36 EST --- Hi Jan, The link to rpm file is not working. Could you please fix it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 746215] Review Request: perl-RT-Authen-ExternalAuth - RT Authentication using External Sources
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746215 Gabriel Somlo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||so...@cmu.edu --- Comment #5 from Gabriel Somlo 2012-03-08 11:29:01 EST --- I'm interested in using this (on F16). Michal, do you have any immediate plans to request builds and release the package ? Alternatively, are you interested in a co-maintainer ? :) Thanks, --Gabriel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800746] Review Request: jboss-naming - The JBoss JNDI name server 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=800746 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 11:24:43 EST --- jboss-naming-5.0.6-0.2.CR1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jboss-naming-5.0.6-0.2.CR1.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800746] Review Request: jboss-naming - The JBoss JNDI name server 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=800746 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System 2012-03-08 11:15:38 EST --- Package httpd-itk-2.2.22-5.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 httpd-itk-2.2.22-5.fc17' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-3388/httpd-itk-2.2.22-5.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 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930
--- Comment #10 from Brendan Jones 2012-03-08
10:23:28 EST ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> >
> > You need to include all of the upstream license files with a summary.
> > Because
> > the content licenses are different in the data subpackage you can add a
> > separate License tag for this sub-package. You can't include the Debian
> > file as
> > a license as they are not upstream and have no authority here.
>
> So in effect, you are asking me to disregard the work already done by me in
> Debian to create a clear license breakdown, and to rewrite this information in
> a crappy non-standardised format?
Here's the guidelines regarding the situation and your options.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios
Apologies, I stand corrected, you can include a file in the %doc section which
outlines the breakdown, but you don't need to pull in a debian tarball. Just
copy the breakdown into a new file, removing debian references, and include it
as a Source and move it into %doc in our install section.
>
> I'll see if I can commit this info upstream and and pull that commit blob in
> as
> a patch instead. That would make the information "authoritative", right?
>
>
> I've switched to using Patch#s and skipped the debug flag patch, instead using
> CXXFLAGS+=-g in the make invocation.
You should be using CXXFLAGS=%{optflags}
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags
IF this still results in the use of non standard compiler flags, you may need
to sed/patch the makefile in you %prep section.
>
> Latest spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/3/redeclipse.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 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930 --- Comment #9 from Martin Erik Werner 2012-03-08 10:02:55 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > > > Upstream tarball has embedded libs without source code (sdl, freetype, ...), > > hence I take it repacking is required, And I'm taking the opportunity to > > remove > > the associated headers for these libs (no need to document a slew of > > copyrights), along with the osx/win-specific content. > > Should any of this be left alone instead? > > Just remove the offending libraries / directories in the %prep section. No > need > to remove the osx/win stuff as long as you don't build against it, nor include > any of the files in your %file section Ah, I assumed the srpms was required to be "clean" and "open-source" (in addition to distributable).. Since not, then I agree, no repack needed. > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios > > : > > "Since this is a multiple licensing scenario, the package must contain a > > comment explaining the multiple licensing breakdown. The actual > > implementation > > of this is left to the maintainer." > > > > Since the license breakdown is humongous, I consider using the Debian > > copyright > > files are my best bet. > > You need to include all of the upstream license files with a summary. Because > the content licenses are different in the data subpackage you can add a > separate License tag for this sub-package. You can't include the Debian file > as > a license as they are not upstream and have no authority here. So in effect, you are asking me to disregard the work already done by me in Debian to create a clear license breakdown, and to rewrite this information in a crappy non-standardised format? I'll see if I can commit this info upstream and and pull that commit blob in as a patch instead. That would make the information "authoritative", right? I've switched to using Patch#s and skipped the debug flag patch, instead using CXXFLAGS+=-g in the make invocation. Latest spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/3/redeclipse.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 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 --- Comment #11 from Johannes Schmid 2012-03-08 09:40:27 EST --- Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801439] New: Review Request: rubygem-netrc - Library to read and write netrc files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-netrc - Library to read and write netrc files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801439 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-netrc - Library to read and write netrc files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: vondr...@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/vondruch/rubygem-netrc.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-netrc-0.7-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: This library can read and update netrc files, preserving formatting including comments and whitespace. Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3869119 Please note that there is no yet specified license: https://github.com/geemus/netrc/issues/4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798654] Review Request: cmpi-bindings - CMPI-compliant provider interface for various languages via SWIG
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798654 --- Comment #2 from Vitezslav Crhonek 2012-03-08 08:28:45 EST --- Fixed version: http://vcrhonek.fedorapeople.org/cmpi-bindings/cmpi-bindings.spec http://vcrhonek.fedorapeople.org/cmpi-bindings/cmpi-bindings-0.4.17-2.fc16.src.rpm (In reply to comment #1) > Rpmlint output: > cmpi-bindings.src: W: invalid-url Source0: cmpi-bindings-0.4.17.tar.bz2 > This looks fine, upstream does not have a website. > > cmpi-bindings-pywbem.x86_64: W: no-documentation > At least upstream README and LICENSE should be there. I'd appreciate also > some README.Fedora which would specify, where python providers are expected. Documentation added, README.Fedora created (please let me know whether the content is ok). > > The package should create and own /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages/pycim > directory. Fixed. > > Otherwise, all MUST review items are OK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
