[Bug 807328] Review Request: drupal6-og - Organic Group Module for Drupal6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807328 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 02:10:26 EDT --- drupal6-og-2.2-4.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 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment 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=470696 --- Comment #111 from Hongli Lai hongli...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 02:55:18 EDT --- Good to hear that things have been solved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 Matthieu Saulnier casper.le.fan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Matthieu Saulnier casper.le.fan...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 03:09:24 EDT --- I've fixed the license tag : Spec URL: http://fantom.fedorapeople.org/exif.spec SRPM URL: http://fantom.fedorapeople.org/exif-0.6.20-3.fc17.src.rpm New Package SCM Request === Package Name: exif Short Description: Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG files Owners: fantom Branches: f15 f16 f17 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 505154] Tracker: Review Requests for Science and Technology related packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505154 Clément DAVID c.davi...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||811661 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811661] Review Request: scirenderer - A Java rendering library based on JoGL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811661 Clément DAVID c.davi...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED Blocks||505154(FE-SCITECH) --- Comment #1 from Clément DAVID c.davi...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 03:31:02 EDT --- Spec URL: http://davidcl.fedorapeople.org/scirenderer.spec SRPM URL: http://davidcl.fedorapeople.org/scirenderer-0.3.5-2.fc16.src.rpm changes: Fix the javadoc build issues (non ASCII characters). rpmlint: PASS koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3987042 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 --- Comment #9 from Matthieu Saulnier casper.le.fan...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 04:13:31 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: exif Short Description: Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG files Owners: fantom Branches: f15 f16 f17 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669 Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669 --- Comment #6 from Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 05:02:14 EDT --- I think there's a missing BuildRequirement on maven-surefire-provider-junit4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 805013] Review Request: ecasound - Music application for multitrack audio editing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=805013 Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(callkalpa@gmail.c | |om) | --- Comment #5 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 05:20:26 EDT --- Hi Brendan, We are having festival season here so it will take some time. Meanwhile if you or someone else is willing to take over please do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810676] Review Request: aws - Ada Web Server (Web framework for Ada)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810676 --- Comment #5 from Pavel Zhukov pa...@zhukoff.net 2012-04-13 05:25:56 EDT --- I have changed copyrights preambula for aws.gpr build_aws.gpr and tools.gpr files. Please check http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3987294 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809503] Review Request: liquibase - Database refactoring tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809503
Lukáš Zapletal l...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||l...@redhat.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|l...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Lukáš Zapletal l...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 05:36:44 EDT ---
Hi Devan,
taking for review.
MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]
[lzap@lzapx Download]$ rpmlint liquibase-2.0.3-5.fc18.noarch.rpm
liquibase.noarch: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Liquibase
liquibase.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US trackable -
traceable, tractable, track able
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-change/liquibase-ext-change.iml
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/samples.iml
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-changewithnestedtags/liquibase-ext-changewithnestedtags.iml
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-changewithnestedtags/src/main/java/liquibase/ext/changewithnestedtags/SampleGrandChild.java
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-sqlgenerator/src/main/java/liquibase/ext/samplesqlgenerator/SampleUpdateGenerator.java
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/changelog.txt
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-changewithnestedtags/src/main/java/liquibase/ext/changewithnestedtags/ChangeWithNestedTags.java
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-sqlgenerator/pom.xml
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-changewithnestedtags/src/main/java/liquibase/ext/changewithnestedtags/SampleChild.java
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-changewithnestedtags/pom.xml
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-sqlgenerator/liquibase-ext-sqlgenerator.iml
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-change/pom.xml
liquibase.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/liquibase-2.0.3/samples/liquibase-ext-change/src/main/java/liquibase/ext/changesample/SampleChange.java
liquibase.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary liquibase
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.
[lzap@lzapx Download]$ rpmlint liquibase-2.0.3-5.fc16.src.rpm
liquibase.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Liquibase
liquibase.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US trackable - traceable,
tractable, track able
liquibase.src: W: invalid-url Source0: liquibase-2.0.3.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
FIX: The git clone command is missing tag or hash. Your instructions will lead
to master/random tarball.
Please consider using generate-tarball script as described here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3987265
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [18]
Consider generating javadoc and adding -doc package delivering both docs and
samples. See the section at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java
FIX: All JAR files MUST go into %{_javadir} or a Java-version specific
directory %{_javadir}-* as appropriate[1].
Please use the Fedora macro for javadir.
Please consider using build-java-classpath. So instead:
export LIQUIBASE_HOME=/usr/share/java/
use
CP=$(build-classpath liquibase)
Or consider using wrapper script auto generator from Wrapper Scripts section.
Looks good.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You
[Bug 809950] Review Request: gradle - Groovy based build 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=809950 Carlo de Wolf cdew...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||769321 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810010] Review Request: genders - file based database for cluster managment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810010 --- Comment #10 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 06:42:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) And I'll have to submit more packages of better quality then ;). Fine. The easiest way is still to do reviews of other packages, which is basically what you did in bug #812161, just a bit more verbosely. Some have a checklist: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jlaska/Package_Review_Checklist but writing a list what you checked (and what remains as blocker in the review) manually is fine either. Submitting more packages is usually more work ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669 --- Comment #7 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it 2012-04-13 07:19:12 EDT --- at this time would not be superfluous? in available sources, there are no tests to be performed here https://svn.codehaus.org/janino/tags/V_2_6_1/ also there aren't tests to be performed tks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784608] Review Request: kdevelop-custom-buildsystem - Support for custom buildsystem in KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784608 --- Comment #6 from Radek Novacek rnova...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 07:27:19 EDT --- Spec URL: http://rnovacek.fedorapeople.org/kdevelop-custom-buildsystem.spec SRPM URL: http://rnovacek.fedorapeople.org/kdevelop-custom-buildsystem-1.2.1-3.fc17.src.rpm * Fri Apr 13 2012 Radek Novacek rnova...@redhat.com 1.2.1-3 - Update source url to match stable release - Require stable version kdevelop 4.3.0 Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3987507 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017
--- Comment #17 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 07:31:35
EDT ---
+ rpmlint output
Rpmlint output is extensive, but consists of false alarms or
things which the packager has assured me are not a problem.
+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ license matches the actual package license
+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
Built in Koji and on x86-64.
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun
+ does not use Prefix: /usr
+ package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8
+ use %global instead of %define
Optional:
n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if
available
+ reviewer should build the package in mock
n/a the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
It's a noarch package, so not applicable.
? review should test the package functions as described
+ scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
n/a shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or
/usr/sbin
This package is APPROVED by rjones
--
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 --- Comment #18 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 07:34:33 EDT --- Thank you very much Richard! Please let me know if you have any suggestion to improve the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 07:36:53 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ovirt-engine Short Description: Management server for Open Virtualization Owners: jhernand Branches: f17 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669 --- Comment #8 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it 2012-04-13 07:46:57 EDT --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/janino.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/janino-2.6.1-4.fc16.src.rpm added missing BR maven-surefire-provider-junit4 for prevent mock build failure -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812325] New: Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 Summary: Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mgold...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/apt-maven-plugin/1.0-0.1.alpha4/apt-maven-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/apt-maven-plugin/1.0-0.1.alpha4/apt-maven-plugin-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17.src.rpm Description: This plugin provides goals to run the Annotation Processing Tool (apt) against project sources. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3987572 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669 --- Comment #9 from Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 07:48:05 EDT --- I will review this package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807331] Review Request: drupal6-addthis - AddThis module for Drupal6.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807331 --- Comment #7 from Anderson Silva ansi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 07:59:05 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: drupal6-addthis Short Description: AddThis module for Drupal6. Owners: afsilva Branches: f16 f17 el6 somehow the Owners: got deleted on my previous post -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807331] Review Request: drupal6-addthis - AddThis module for Drupal6.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807331 Anderson Silva ansi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Anderson Silva ansi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 07:57:32 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: drupal6-addthis Short Description: AddThis module for Drupal6. Branches: f16 f17 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 807331] Review Request: drupal6-addthis - AddThis module for Drupal6.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807331 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 08:09:20 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 08:08:10 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 --- Comment #20 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 08:08:58 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 --- Comment #21 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 08:12:54 EDT --- Thanks a lot Jon! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669 --- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it 2012-04-13 08:23:03 EDT --- Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3987665 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811239] Review Request: perl-Data-Dumper - Stringify perl data structures, suitable for printing and eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811239 --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 08:22:40 EDT --- You're right. Updated package is at the same place. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809806] Review Request: perl-Devel-Autoflush - Set autoflush from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809806 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 08:30:07 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Devel-Autoflush Short Description: Set autoflush from the command line Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809806] Review Request: perl-Devel-Autoflush - Set autoflush from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809806 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810926] Review Request: rubygem-qpid - Ruby bindings for the Qpid messaging 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=810926
--- Comment #10 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 08:30:05
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Thank you.
Another note. You should be able to remove the %{gemdir} and %{geminstir}
macro
definitions if you follow the new packaging guidelines [1] and use
rubygems-devel package, which provide these macros (better to say the
underscore alternatives). There are also helpful macros you can use in the
%file section, etc.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby
Thank you. I've incorporated those changes as well.
Updated SPEC: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-qpid.spec
Updated SRPM:
http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-qpid-0.16.0-4.fc18.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 806093] Review Request: glade - User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806093
Rui Matos tiagoma...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tiagoma...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Rui Matos tiagoma...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 08:29:23 EDT ---
Just one more thing which IMO isn't a blocker:
%descriptiondevel
The %{name}-devel package contains libraries and header files for
developing applications that use %{name}.
applications that use glade isn't strictly correct. Some (certainly very far
from the majority) applications might use glade's widgets from the libgladeui-2
library but most won't have any dependency on any of these subpackages here.
So, I think it should say:
The %{name}-devel package contains libraries and header files for
developing applications that use %{name}'s widgets library.
Anyway, this looks APPROVED 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 809843] Review Request: perl-Test-Reporter - Sends test results to cpan-test...@perl.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809843 --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 08:35:41 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Test-Reporter Short Description: Sends test results to cpan-test...@perl.org Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809843] Review Request: perl-Test-Reporter - Sends test results to cpan-test...@perl.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809843 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811239] Review Request: perl-Data-Dumper - Stringify perl data structures, suitable for printing and eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811239
Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 08:36:44 EDT ---
diff --git a/perl-Data-Dumper.spec b/perl-Data-Dumper.spec
index fdd8d14..70febf5 100644
--- a/perl-Data-Dumper.spec
+++ b/perl-Data-Dumper.spec
@@ -10,12 +10,14 @@ BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
# Run-time:
BuildRequires: perl(Carp)
BuildRequires: perl(Exporter)
+BuildRequires: perl(Scalar::Util)
BuildRequires: perl(XSLoader)
# Tests only:
BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) = 0.60
# Optional tests:
BuildRequires: perl(Encode)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo
$versi
+Requires: perl(Scalar::Util)
Requires: perl(XSLoader)
%{?perl_default_filter}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809806] Review Request: perl-Devel-Autoflush - Set autoflush from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809806 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 08:36:43 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811239] Review Request: perl-Data-Dumper - Stringify perl data structures, suitable for printing and eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811239 --- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 09:11:59 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Data-Dumper Short Description: Stringify perl data structures, suitable for printing and eval Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811239] Review Request: perl-Data-Dumper - Stringify perl data structures, suitable for printing and eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811239 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669 --- Comment #11 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it 2012-04-13 09:16:07 EDT --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/janino.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/janino-2.6.1-5.fc16.src.rpm commons-compiler spec file merged -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809843] Review Request: perl-Test-Reporter - Sends test results to cpan-test...@perl.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809843 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 09:12:22 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809806] Review Request: perl-Devel-Autoflush - Set autoflush from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809806 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Devel-Autoflush-0.05-1 ||.fc18 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-04-13 09:13:47 --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 09:13:47 EDT --- Thank you for the review and the 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 806093] Review Request: glade - User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806093
Rui Matos tiagoma...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review+ |fedora-review?
--- Comment #7 from Rui Matos tiagoma...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 09:19:14 EDT ---
Here's a more formal review and it actually caught a problem:
+ OK
! needs attention
rpmlint output:
glade.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided glade3
glade.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/glade-3.12.0/COPYING.LGPL
glade.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/glade-3.12.0/COPYING.GPL
glade.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary glade-previewer
glade.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary glade
glade-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/glade-3.12.0/gladeui/glade-accumulators.c
glade-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/glade-3.12.0/src/glade-close-button.h
glade-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/glade-3.12.0/src/glade-close-button.c
glade-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/glade-3.12.0/gladeui/glade-clipboard.c
glade-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/glade-3.12.0/plugins/gtk+/glade-fixed.c
glade-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/glade-3.12.0/gladeui/glade-builtins.c
glade-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided glade3-libgladeui-devel
glade-libs.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided glade3-libgladeui
glade-libs.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/glade-libs-3.12.0/COPYING.LGPL
glade-libs.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/glade-libs-3.12.0/COPYING.GPL
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 10 errors, 5 warnings.
+ Rpmlint warnings/errors are harmless and can be ignored
+ The package is named according to Fedora packaging guidelines
+ The spec file name matches the base package name.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The license field in the spec file matches the actual license
+ The package contains the license file (COPYING)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm. md5sum:
bc743c2b94b674770b67cbc0c90fb3eb glade-3.12.0.tar.xz
bc743c2b94b674770b67cbc0c90fb3eb glade-3.12.0.tar.xz.upstream
+ The package builds in koji
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires look sane
+ The spec file handles locales properly
+ ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
+ Package isn't relocatable
+ Package MUST own all the directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ Permissions are properly set
+ Consistent use of macros
+ The package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
+ Header files should be in -devel
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
+ Library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package
+ -devel must require the fully versioned base
+ Packages should not contain libtool .la files
+ Proper .desktop file handling
! Doesn't own files or directories already owned by other packages
%doc %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/
This is taking ownership of both
/usr/share/gtk-doc
/usr/share/gtk-doc/html
which doesn't look right. Instead the -devel package should require gtk-doc I
believe. Hmmm, and now that I look at it, the build.log says:
Build Reference Manual: no
but here it is being installed. Sounds like an upstream bug, but gtk-doc should
be added to the BuildRequires too and maybe explicitly enable gtk-doc in
%configure.
+ Filenames are valid UTF-8
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811239] Review Request: perl-Data-Dumper - Stringify perl data structures, suitable for printing and eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811239 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 09:26:51 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 09:34:23 EDT --- exif-0.6.20-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/exif-0.6.20-3.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669
--- Comment #12 from Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 09:32:16
EDT ---
Summary:
- remove unzip as a BuildRequirement
- use %{name} and %{version} in source and patch file names
Otherwise, looks good
Issues:
[!]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: These BR are not needed: unzip
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
=== Remove unzip as BuildRequirement
[!]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
=== Not sure why this is warning about this; the use of the license seems fine
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint janino-2.6.1-4.fc18.noarch.rpm
janino.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bytecode - byte code,
byte-code, decorate
janino.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US evaluators - evaluates,
evaporators, elevators
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
rpmlint janino-javadoc-2.6.1-4.fc18.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint janino-2.6.1-4.fc18.src.rpm
janino.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bytecode - byte code,
byte-code, decorate
janino.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US evaluators - evaluates,
evaporators, elevators
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
rpmlint commons-compiler-jdk-2.6.1-4.fc18.noarch.rpm
commons-compiler-jdk.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codehaus
- Wodehouse
commons-compiler-jdk.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
ExpressionEvaluator - Expressionless
commons-compiler-jdk.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US janino -
Janine
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint
=== Not a problem
[!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/mef3/806669/commons-compiler-2.6.1.pom :
MD5SUM this package : None
MD5SUM upstream package : d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
/home/mef3/806669/commons-compiler-jdk-2.6.1.pom :
MD5SUM this package : cf7244a092e8f6cf9e66f620b90fc5dd
MD5SUM upstream package : d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
/home/mef3/806669/janino-2.6.1.zip :
MD5SUM this package : bd1f9d38b8329017e469503baf53cf5b
MD5SUM upstream package : bd1f9d38b8329017e469503baf53cf5b
/home/mef3/806669/janino-2.6.1.pom :
MD5SUM this package : 968962e5591e36bbec8696f70443b5f3
MD5SUM upstream package : d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
=== This is because you can't wget files from repo1.maven.org with the default
user agent. I
tried downloading them myself manually and got this, which matches the files in
the SRPM:
f99e0f69541e17c8f160799b056720b4 commons-compiler-2.6.1.pom
cf7244a092e8f6cf9e66f620b90fc5dd commons-compiler-jdk-2.6.1.pom
968962e5591e36bbec8696f70443b5f3 janino-2.6.1.pom
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[!]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: These BR are not needed: unzip
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm
[Bug 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 09:39:42 EDT --- exif-0.6.20-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/exif-0.6.20-3.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 783825] Review Request: suil - A lightweight C library for loading and wrapping LV2 plugin UIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783825 --- Comment #33 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 09:37:32 EDT --- I raised this on the packaging list as asked. Comments from Toshio only at this stage, confirming my approach. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2012-April/008276.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 09:38:12 EDT --- exif-0.6.20-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/exif-0.6.20-3.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809843] Review Request: perl-Test-Reporter - Sends test results to cpan-test...@perl.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809843 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Test-Reporter-1.58-1.f ||c18 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-04-13 09:45:09 --- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 09:45:09 EDT --- Thank you for the review and the repository. I decided to keep the COPYING file because I believe upstream will fix it in next release. In addition, the file does not contradict copyright. It's just a little stronger. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806093] Review Request: glade - User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806093 --- Comment #8 from Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 09:54:38 EDT --- Multiple directory ownership is permitted to avoid depending on package which we wouldn't normally depend on. There's a section in the packaging guidelines that explains this, and specifically mentions the gtk-doc case: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#The_directory_is_owned_by_a_package_which_is_not_required_for_your_package_to_function Hmmm, and now that I look at it, the build.log says: Build Reference Manual: no but here it is being installed. Sounds like an upstream bug, but gtk-doc should be added to the BuildRequires too and maybe explicitly enable gtk-doc in %configure. Upstream tarball ships with prebuilt documentation. --enable-gtk-doc is needed when we have to rebuild the docs, for example when building from git. But in this case we can use what's in the tarball. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811239] Review Request: perl-Data-Dumper - Stringify perl data structures, suitable for printing and eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811239 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Data-Dumper-2.131-1.fc ||18 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-04-13 09:57:22 --- Comment #7 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 09:57:22 EDT --- Thank you for the review and the 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 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 10:13:14 EDT --- ovirt-engine-3.0.0.0001-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ovirt-engine-3.0.0.0001-1.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 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806093] Review Request: glade - User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806093 Rui Matos tiagoma...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Rui Matos tiagoma...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 10:26:40 EDT --- Oh ok, that sounds logical. So it's all good then. APPROVED again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800867] Review Request: simplesamlphp - PHP SAML 2.0 service provider and identity provider
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800867 Jason Corley jason.cor...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason.cor...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Jason Corley jason.cor...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 10:26:58 EDT --- not sure how much this matters to you but if you change the find in %setup from: find . -type f -executable -not -path '*/bin/*' | xargs chmod -x to: find . -type f -perm /a+x -not -path '*/bin/*' | xargs chmod -x this package will build on 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 806093] Review Request: glade - User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806093 Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 10:35:24 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Rui! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: glade Short Description: User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME Owners: kalev Branches: f17 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||juan.hernan...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juan.hernan...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 10:39:51 EDT --- I am doing this 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 812384] New: Review Request: ghc-sendfile - Portable sendfile library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ghc-sendfile - Portable sendfile library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812384 Summary: Review Request: ghc-sendfile - Portable sendfile library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: peter...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-sendfile/ghc-sendfile.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-sendfile/ghc-sendfile-0.7.6-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: A portable sendfile library used by the Happstack webserver http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3988458 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812384] Review Request: ghc-sendfile - Portable sendfile 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=812384 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-haskell-list@redhat. ||com Status Whiteboard||Ready -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806093] Review Request: glade - User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806093 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 11:07:42 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812384] Review Request: ghc-sendfile - Portable sendfile 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=812384 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||ghc-sendfile -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812384] Review Request: ghc-sendfile - Portable sendfile 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=812384 --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 11:12:17 EDT --- This should be the last dependency for happstack-server. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325
Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) |
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-04-13
11:28:05 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
Output of rpmlint of the source package:
$ rpmlint apt-maven-plugin-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17.src.rpm
apt-maven-plugin.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
apt-maven-plugin-1.0.alpha4.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
This warning is acceptable as the source has been checked out from SCM.
Output of rpmlint of the binary packages:
rpmlint apt-maven-plugin-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc18.noarch.rpm
apt-maven-plugin-javadoc-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc18.noarch.rpm
apt-maven-plugin-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -
Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
These spelling warnings are acceptable.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3988450
[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: MIT
[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.
Checked using a recursive diff of the sources.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[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
[x] 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:
[Bug 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 11:44:14 EDT --- Thank you for review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: apt-maven-plugin Short Description: Apt Maven Plugin Owners:goldmann Branches: f17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 804125] Review Request: rdkit - A toolkit for cheminformatics and machine learning
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804125
--- Comment #3 from Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 11:45:55 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #2)
Perhaps spell cheminformatics out to chemical informatics (perhaps even
information science).
used chemical informatics, despite I'm not really used to call it that way.
rdkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/libSmilesParse.so.1.2011.12.1 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
rdkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/libSLNParse.so.1.2011.12.1 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
I'm not sure what you can do about these other then logging a ticket upstream
with the details on why this is bad.
Already did it in the past, but it seems that comes from some code
auto-generated during build. I will try to further investigate if you think
this is a blocker
rdkit-extras.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/RDKit/Contrib/M_Kossner/Frames.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
rdkit-extras.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/RDKit/Projects/SDView4/SDView.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings.
Fixed
These you can correct with a simple snippet - either choose to make the files
executable (mind you: may trigger a executable script in non-standard
location type of warning or error), or remove the shebang (mind you: may
render the program disfunctional if it expects to be able to execute these
files through a shell-out).
An example of finding those files:
# Find files with a shebang that do not have executable permissions
for file in `find %{buildroot}/%{geminstdir} -type f ! -perm /a+x -name
*.rb`; do
[ ! -z `head -n 1 $file | grep \^#!/\` ] chmod -v 755 $file
done
.
python-rdkit.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/rdkit/sping/tests/testallps.py 0644L
/usr/bin/env
python-rdkit.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/rdkit/utils/pydoc_local.py 0644L
/usr/bin/env
python-rdkit.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/rdkit/sping/examples/formatted-strings.py
0644L /usr/bin/env
Same as aforementioned; two options; make files executable or remove shebang.
python-rdkit.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/rdkit/sping/WX/pidWX.py
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings.
While an upstream bug, the fix is easy. The address should read:
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
# Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.
So, sping is some (dead) 3rd party code that should be eventually splitted. For
now, I think I will just remove it since it is used to draw chemical structures
when the default backend (cairo) is not available.
/home/kanarip/devel/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/rdkit-debuginfo-2011.12-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm
rdkit-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/RDKit_2011_12_1/Code/RDBoost/python_streambuf.h
rdkit-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/RDKit_2011_12_1/Code/GraphMol/Wrap/ForwardSDMolSupplier.cpp
Remove the executable permissions from these files please;
# Fix anything executable that does not have a shebang
for file in `find %{buildroot}/%{_prefix}/src -type f -perm /a+x`; do
[ -z `head -n 1 $file | grep \^#!/\` ] chmod -v 644 $file
done
Fixed.
Updated package with new upstream release at:
http://giallu.fedorapeople.org/rdkit-2012.03-1.fc16.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 811286] Review Request: rubygem-rhc-rest - Ruby bindings for OpenShift REST 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=811286 --- Comment #15 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 11:50:25 EDT --- Unfortunately, I'm away and disconnected from the net until April 22 (roughly). Sorry we couldn't close this in time, I was rather convinced we should be able to that. But I was wrong in that too. --alec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 11:54:29 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806669] Review Request: janino - An embedded Java compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806669
--- Comment #13 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it 2012-04-13 12:12:52 EDT
---
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/janino.spec
SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/janino-2.6.1-6.fc16.src.rpm
removed BR unzip
used %{name} and %{version} in source and patch file names
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427 --- Comment #133 from Jim Meyering meyer...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 12:31:07 EDT --- Hi Thomas, I've just installed it on F17/x86_64 and (as usual) it works perfectly. Thanks again! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662259] Review Request: git-annex - Manage files with git, without checking their contents in
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662259 Joey Hess j...@kitenet.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||j...@kitenet.net Bug 662259 depends on bug 784802, which changed state. Bug 784802 Summary: Review Request: ghc-lifted-base - Lifted IO operations from the base library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784802 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #14 from Joey Hess j...@kitenet.net 2012-04-13 12:38:39 EDT --- Hi, I'm the author of git-annex, and appreciate your work on getting it into Fedora, since based on user feedback, this is currently one of the harder Linux distributions for users to install it to. I'd really like to make this happen. It seems that the main issue is build dependencies. But there are some ways to work around that. git-annex's git repository has several branches that avoid most of the newer build dependencies. For building with ghc older than 7.4, there is the ghc-7.0 branch. For building without S3 (and its long chain of dependencies noted above), there is a no-s3 branch. It's also possible to avoid monad-control (which also avoids lifted-base), although currently the only branch I have that does do is the debian-stable branch. There's also a no-bloom branch omitting another recent build dependency. These all remove some features (and dropping monal-control removes some robustness in one case), but still leave a quite capable program. I would be quite willing to put together a branch that omits any build dependencies necessary for Fedora, and maintain it for the lifetime of the Fedora release. (Not sure if I can commit to the lifetime of a Red Hat release :) Just get in touch with 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 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 12:43:21 EDT --- apt-maven-plugin-1.0-0.1.alpha4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/apt-maven-plugin-1.0-0.1.alpha4.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 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662259] Review Request: git-annex - Manage files with git, without checking their contents in
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662259 --- Comment #15 from Ben Boeckel maths...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 12:55:55 EDT --- Fewer dependency versions sound good just for getting it into Fedora. I'll see if I can find the time to update to a snapshot with existing deps. We can tack more deps in once they're 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 809614] Review Request: gfal2 - Grid file access library 2.0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809614 Ricardo Rocha rocha.po...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809614] Review Request: gfal2 - Grid file access library 2.0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809614
--- Comment #4 from Ricardo Rocha rocha.po...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 14:35:45
EDT ---
Ok here goes a first round.
[-] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
rpmlint is not silent (on the rpm packages):
gfal2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wlcg - cowl
gfal2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wlcg - cowl
gfal2-all.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) gfal - gal, goal, fall
gfal2-all.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gfal - gal, goal,
fall
gfal2-doc.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Doxygen - Oxygen, D
oxygen
gfal2-plugin-dcap.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gsidcap -
sidecar
gfal2-plugin-dcap.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dCache - d
Cache, cache, cached
gfal2-plugin-gridftp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gsiftp -
sift
gfal2-plugin-lfc.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lfn - NFL
gfal2-plugin-rfio.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dpm - pm,
dim, dam
gfal2-transfer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gfal - gal,
goal, fall
These should all be due to the usage of lowercase.
gfal2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gfal2_version
Any chance of adding it? I know it's probably not meaningful, but it would go
away :-)
gfal2-core.x86_64: W: executable-stack /usr/lib64/libgfal2.so.2.0.0
# rpmlint -I executable-stack
executable-stack:
The binary declares the stack as executable. Executable stack is usually an
error as it is only needed if the code contains GCC trampolines or similar
constructs which uses code on the stack. One common source for needlessly
executable stack cases are object files built from assembler files which don't
define a proper .note.GNU-stack section.
Please check.
13 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 13 warnings.
[=] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
Sorry for pointing this again, but i find it confusing to have a new package
due to a backwards incompatible change.
1) Could the library simple have a soversion major bump instead of a rename?
2) If it's a new version with big changes, then could you consider this:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Multiple_packages_with_the_same_base_name
it suggests versioning the old one and shipping the new one with the actual
name?
It looks like the rename comes from upstream anyway so it should probably go
like this, just pointing this out.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[=] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
Very minor things, but please check:
line 42: 'it' instead of 'It'
line 43: 'system' instead of 'systems'
line 60: 'file' instead of 'files'
line 127: 'allows' instead of 'allow'
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
# md5sum gfal2-2.0.0.tar.gz gfal2-2.0.0.tar.gz.srpm
3be87c77dbaf99078552bfa96cbb97db gfal2-2.0.0.tar.gz
3be87c77dbaf99078552bfa96cbb97db gfal2-2.0.0.tar.gz.srpm
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
Koji builds successful.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3989055 (el5)
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3989059 (el6)
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3989050 (f16)
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3989064 (rawhide)
[+] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
Builds fine with mock and koji.
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro.
[+] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
[+] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any
[Bug 809614] Review Request: gfal2 - Grid file access library 2.0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809614 Ricardo Rocha rocha.po...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611454] Review Request: py-bcrypt - Python bindings for OpenBSD's Blowfish password hashing code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611454 Konstantin Ryabitsev i...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||i...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #22 from Konstantin Ryabitsev i...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 15:09:55 EDT --- Any way we could branch this into EPEL, too? At least for EPEL-6? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 786860] Review Request: opa - Opa, AGPL language for web 2.0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786860 --- Comment #7 from Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 15:52:07 EDT --- Rudy, In comment #4, I asked you to review Bug #772608. Since you didn't review that review request, I will have another package for you to review shortly. The reasoning behind this is people in the packagers group should be able to review other packagers packages to help enhance fedora. I will also have that package reviewer that needs a sponsor review your package and follow up on this 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 784608] Review Request: kdevelop-custom-buildsystem - Support for custom buildsystem in KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784608 --- Comment #7 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de 2012-04-13 16:33:17 EDT --- - please use global instead of define at the top http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define and more important: How does this plugin work, actually? I can't see anything (besides cmake, make) in the project configuration. I'm on f16 kdevelop 4.3 kde 4.8.2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784608] Review Request: kdevelop-custom-buildsystem - Support for custom buildsystem in KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784608 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gre...@freenet.de 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 737401] Review Request: saga - Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737401 --- Comment #15 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2012-04-13 17:25:04 EDT --- Rawhide seems to be broken right now, so I built in F17: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3989496 Vigra 1.8 has a slight API change, that caused the problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796465] Review Request: exif - Utility to show EXIF information hidden in JPEG 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=796465 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 17:30:07 EDT --- exif-0.6.20-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743615] Review Request: nagios-plugins-openmanage - Nagios plugin to monitor hardware health on Dell servers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743615 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|nagios-plugins-openmanage-3 |nagios-plugins-openmanage-3 |.7.3-3.fc15 |.7.3-3.fc16 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 17:33:51 EDT --- nagios-plugins-openmanage-3.7.3-3.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 743615] Review Request: nagios-plugins-openmanage - Nagios plugin to monitor hardware health on Dell servers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743615 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||nagios-plugins-openmanage-3 ||.7.3-3.fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-04-13 17:31:54 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 17:31:54 EDT --- nagios-plugins-openmanage-3.7.3-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806093] Review Request: glade - User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806093 Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version||glade-3.12.0-3.fc17 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-04-13 18:04:29 --- Comment #12 from Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 18:04:29 EDT --- Package imported and built; closing the ticket. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809614] Review Request: gfal2 - Grid file access library 2.0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809614
--- Comment #5 from adev ade...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 18:40:08 EDT ---
Thank you a lot Ricardo for this review,
I have updated the sources from your comments.
Spec URL: http://firwen.org/home/specs/gfal2.spec
SRPM URL: http://firwen.org/home/specs/gfal2-2.0.0-0.6.beta.el5.centos.src.rpm
W: spelling-error
- all corrected, descriptions have been updated for more explicit ones.
gfal2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gfal2_version
- done
gfal2-core.x86_64: W: executable-stack /usr/lib64/libgfal2.so.2.0.0
GFAL 2.0 uses a lot the GCC C nested functions in the current state, the nested
functions usage needs an executable-stack. This cannot be avoided.
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
Sorry for pointing this again, but i find it confusing to have a new package
due to a backwards incompatible change.
Proceed to a so bump will break existing working packages that relies on gfal (
1.0 ) functionalities that has been suppressed on gfal 2.0. this will probably
cause more troubles than benefits.
Concerning the versioning the old gfal, several externals meta-packages ( EMI
project, glite-projects ) depends directly on the gfal package names in
differents project, and I wish to not not break this.
Indeed, several populars packages like glib - glib2, gtk - gtk2, sqlite -
sqlite2, glade - glade2, ... etc.. proceed in the same way than gfal - gfal2.
I think that the changes between gfal 1.0 and gfal 2.0 are too big to be
considered like a simple update, or a transparent name swap.
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
- corrected too.
Thank you again.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 803531] Review Request: DMitry - network information gathering tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803531 Anthony Sasadeusz sasad...@umbc.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Last Closed||2012-04-13 18:54:19 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810928] Review Request: sticky-notes - Sticky notes is a free and open source paste-bin application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810928
Athmane Madjoudj athma...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #577135|0 |1
is obsolete||
Attachment #577191|0 |1
is obsolete||
--- Comment #11 from Athmane Madjoudj athma...@gmail.com 2012-04-13 20:10:43
EDT ---
Created attachment 577433
-- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=577433
Fix for some security issues (Cross-site scripting and SQL Injections)
Patch that fixes some SQL Injection in admin interface, I merged all patchs
into this one.
Merge request updated to include new fixes:
https://gitorious.org/sticky-notes/sticky-notes/merge_requests/2
Also, forcing 'HttpOnly' cookies does not seem to work, because of the
following JS calls (jQuery Cookie plugin):
skins/$SKINNAME/js/main.js:var author = $.cookie('stickynotes_author');
skins/$SKINNAME/js/main.js:var language = $.cookie('stickynotes_language');
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 807017] Review Request: ovirt-engine - Management server for Open Virtualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807017 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 21:46:44 EDT --- ovirt-engine-3.0.0.0001-1.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 812325] Review Request: apt-maven-plugin - Apt Maven Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812325 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-13 21:44:41 EDT --- apt-maven-plugin-1.0-0.1.alpha4.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 662275] Review Request: hledger - A double-entry accounting tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662275 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|notready|Ready Bug 662275 depends on bug 798506, which changed state. Bug 798506 Summary: Review Request: ghc-cabal-file-th - Template Haskell expressions for reading cabal files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798506 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2012-04-13 23:21:53 EDT --- Seems to build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3987062 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662259] Review Request: git-annex - Manage files with git, without checking their contents in
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662259 --- Comment #16 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2012-04-14 00:09:10 EDT --- Thank you, Joe, for reaching out to us. :-) We now have lifted-base (and monad-control) in Fedora at least. :) I think we are gradually getting closer to being able to package the main hackage. Seems now we are still missing packages: - bloomfilter - hS3 - Crypto, hxt* - IfElse - SHA So yes it is probably a good idea initially to package merging the no-S3 branch, since hxt is quite a few packages. Of course it would be nice to have S3 support in Fedora later. Ben: do you have time to try for that? Joe: I assume adding an S3 flag to git-annex.cabal is not practical? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662259] Review Request: git-annex - Manage files with git, without checking their contents in
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662259 --- Comment #17 from Ben Boeckel maths...@gmail.com 2012-04-14 00:24:39 EDT --- SHA is needed in the yesod and gitit stacks anyways (though yesod has *lots* to get through yet until SHA is an issue, gitit less so), so that could be bumped up my list. IfElse and bloomfilter look easy. Sunday is probably the earliest I'll get to this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809395] Review Request: jboss-as - JBoss Application 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=809395 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||jboss-as-7.1.0-2.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-04-14 00:26:12 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-14 00:26:12 EDT --- jboss-as-7.1.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798616] Review Request: jboss-ejb3-ext-api - JBoss EJB 3 Extension 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=798616 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||jboss-ejb3-ext-api-2.0.0-2. ||fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-04-14 00:30:38 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-04-14 00:30:38 EDT --- jboss-ejb3-ext-api-2.0.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
