[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 Simon Lewis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||simon.le...@slnet-online.de --- Comment #8 from Simon Lewis 2012-04-18 02:34:13 EDT --- This is a great mixer as you can precisely set the gain levels and the level controls show exactly which gain steps are availble on the sound card. I would recomend setting qasmixer as the standard mixer on the KDE version of fedora replacing kmix... Simon -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806670] Review Request: jcifs - Common Internet File System Client in 100% Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806670 Marek Goldmann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mgold...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgold...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Marek Goldmann 2012-04-18 02:29:49 EDT --- I'll take a look at it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813054] Review Request: tycho-extras - Additional plugins for tycho
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813054 Alexander Kurtakov 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 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 --- Comment #7 from Brendan Jones 2012-04-18 01:44:36 EDT --- Hi Richard, seems to be failing in koji build --scratch dist-rawhide but not f16 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4000829 Also, just raising as a point of discussion, the Razor developers took a slightly differnt approach and split out qasmixer into a separate package (although always requiring the main package that owns /usr/share/qastools). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 747031] Review Request: ghc-hs-bibutils - Haskell bindings to bibutils, the bibliography conversion utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=747031 JudeNagurney changed: What|Removed |Added CC||j...@pwan.org --- Comment #5 from JudeNagurney 2012-04-18 01:30:26 EDT --- I'm commenting on this ticket as per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656892#c11 You may want to use the %gh_files macro to make sure the LICENSE and README file are published at the expected location. I don't know if this macro is available in cabal2spec 0.24, so I would also reiterate comment #3 request to update the packaging to use cabal2spec 0.25.4. An example of using %ghc_files is at http://code.haskell.org/augeas/packaging/rpm/ghc-augeas.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 808336] Review Request: dia-gnomeDIAicons - Beautiful icon set for dia diagram editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808336 --- Comment #21 from Arthur Buliva 2012-04-18 01:23:24 EDT --- Am having probblems cloning this package. This is what I have so far: [makerpm@ fedora-scm]$ ssh-add Could not open a connection to your authentication agent. [makerpm@ fedora-scm]$ exec ssh-agent bash [makerpm@ fedora-scm]$ fedpkg clone dia-gnomeDIAicons Cloning into 'dia-gnomeDIAicons'... Permission denied (publickey). fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly Could not execute clone: Command '['git', 'clone', 'ssh://art...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/dia-gnomeDIAicons']' returned non-zero exit status 128 [makerpm@ fedora-scm]$ git clone ssh://arthurbuliva:x...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/dia-gnomeDIAicons Cloning into 'dia-gnomeDIAicons'... Permission denied (publickey). fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly [makerpm@ fedora-scm]$ What do I do please? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813542] Review Request: Pivy - Python binding for Coin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813542 Kalev Lember changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||kalevlem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kalevlem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Kalev Lember 2012-04-17 21:53:51 EDT --- Taking for review. Instead of 'Pivy', I believe this package should be named 'python-pivy', as per python naming guidelines: "Packages of python modules (thus they rely on python as a parent) use a slightly different naming scheme. They should take into account the upstream name of the python module. This makes a package name format of python-$NAME. When in doubt, use the name of the module that you type to import it in a script." http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28python_modules.29 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813594] Review Request: pwauth - External plugin for mod_authnz_external authenticator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813594 --- Comment #1 from Philip Prindeville 2012-04-17 21:29:59 EDT --- $ rpmlint pwauth.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint pwauth-2.3.10-0.el6.src.rpm pwauth.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging pwauth.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) authnz -> author, authentic, autobahn pwauth.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) authenticator -> authentication, authenticated, authenticate pwauth.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authenticator -> authentication, authenticated, authenticate pwauth.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US auth -> auto, Ruth, author pwauth.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authnz -> author, authentic, autobahn 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. $ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813594] New: Review Request: pwauth - External plugin for mod_authnz_external authenticator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pwauth - External plugin for mod_authnz_external authenticator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813594 Summary: Review Request: pwauth - External plugin for mod_authnz_external authenticator Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: phil...@redfish-solutions.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://fedorapeople.org/~philipp/pwauth.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~philipp/pwauth-2.3.10-0.el6.src.rpm Description: Pwauth is an authenticator designed to be used with mod_auth_external or mod_authnz_external and the Apache HTTP daemon to support reasonably secure web authentication out of the system password database on most versions of Unix. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813594] Review Request: pwauth - External plugin for mod_authnz_external authenticator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813594 Philip Prindeville changed: What|Removed |Added Version|rawhide |el6 CC||fedora-package-review@redha ||t.com, ||philipp@redfish-solutions.c ||om Component|Package Review |Package Review Product|Fedora |Fedora EPEL -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810033] Review Request: python-virtualenvwrapper - Enhancements to virtualenv
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810033 Ian Weller changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Ian Weller 2012-04-17 20:53:25 EDT --- Alright, looks good. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813054] Review Request: tycho-extras - Additional plugins for tycho
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813054 Roland Grunberg changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-04-17 20:46:22 --- Comment #6 from Roland Grunberg 2012-04-17 20:46:22 EDT --- tycho-extras has built successfully on rawhide and f17. Closing as NEXTRELEASE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812702] Review Request: ghc-SHA - Message digest functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812702 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: ghc-SHA - |Review Request: ghc-SHA - |SHA message digest |Message digest functions |functions | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810033] Review Request: python-virtualenvwrapper - Enhancements to virtualenv
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810033 --- Comment #5 from Ralph Bean 2012-04-17 20:18:38 EDT --- Whoops -- I went the wrong way. I made the script non-executable instead of adding a shebang. This has been reversed. It is executable again and has a shebang now. Bumped the release in the spec. SPEC: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-virtualenvwrapper.spec SRPM: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-virtualenvwrapper-3.2-2.fc17.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 803082] Review Request: pogo - Probably the simplest and fastest audio player for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803082 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|pogo-0.5-2.fc17 |pogo-0.5-3.el6 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2012-04-17 19:34:24 EDT --- pogo-0.5-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2012-04-17 19:05:31 EDT --- zipios++-0.1.5.9-6.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zipios++-0.1.5.9-6.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 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2012-04-17 19:06:01 EDT --- zipios++-0.1.5.9-6.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zipios++-0.1.5.9-6.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 813564] Review Request: mod_authnz_external - use external means for httpd basic authentication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813564 --- Comment #1 from Philip Prindeville 2012-04-17 18:09:49 EDT --- $ rpmlint mod_authnz_external-3.2.6-0.el6.src.rpm mod_authnz_external.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Mod_Authnz_External mod_authnz_external.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mis -> mus, mos, mid 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. $ rpmlint mod_authnz_external.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813564] New: Review Request: mod_authnz_external - use external means for httpd basic authentication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mod_authnz_external - use external means for httpd basic authentication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813564 Summary: Review Request: mod_authnz_external - use external means for httpd basic authentication Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: phil...@redfish-solutions.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://fedorapeople.org/~philipp/mod_authnz_external.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~philipp/mod_authnz_external-3.2.6-0.el6.src.rpm Description: Mod_Authnz_External is an Apache module used for authentication. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813564] Review Request: mod_authnz_external - use external means for httpd basic authentication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813564 Philip Prindeville changed: What|Removed |Added Version|rawhide |el6 CC||fedora-package-review@redha ||t.com, ||philipp@redfish-solutions.c ||om Component|Package Review |Package Review Product|Fedora |Fedora EPEL -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 803149] Review Request: pyrasite - Code injection and monitoring of running Python processes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803149
--- Comment #3 from Ian Weller 2012-04-17 17:07:41 EDT ---
Review checklist, last updated 2012-02-07
Based on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
Key: [X] passed, [F] failed, [-] irrelevant
[X] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
pyrasite.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrasite-shell
pyrasite.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrasite-memory-viewer
[X] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[X] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[X] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[F] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
License in code is GPLv3+, license in specfile is GPLv3
[X] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[X] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[X] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[F] 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.
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pyrasite/pyrasite-2.0.tar.gz: 404
[X] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[-] 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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not
compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a
comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[X] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[-] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[-] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[X] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[-] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[X] 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.
[X] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)
[X] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
[F] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
From [[Packaging:Guidelines#Macros]]:
"Macro forms of system executables SHOULD NOT be used except when there is a
need to allow the location of those executables to be configurable. For
example, rm should be used in preference to %{__rm}, but %{__python} is
acceptable."
You use %{__make} and %{__gzip} which don't make any sense to be configurable.
[X] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[X] 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).
[X] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program
must run properly if it is not present.
[-] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[-] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package.
[-] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
[-] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these mu
[Bug 803089] Review Request: whenjobs - Replacement for cron with dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089 --- Comment #21 from Michael Scherer 2012-04-17 16:56:23 EDT --- Sorry for not updating this review. While working on the formal review, I noticed that the md5sum is not the same between the spec on people.redhat.com and the rpm : $ md5sum ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/whenjobs-0.7.2.tar.gz ./whenjobs-0.7.2.tar.gz 8b89aa3eeb02c53ed688edd32546d9bc /home/misc/rpmbuild/SOURCES/whenjobs-0.7.2.tar.gz c201788e584dd63891d11295cf9b5788 ./whenjobs-0.7.2.tar.gz is this normal ? ( there is basically 2 bytes missing, that's rather strange ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810033] Review Request: python-virtualenvwrapper - Enhancements to virtualenv
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810033 --- Comment #4 from Ian Weller 2012-04-17 16:47:24 EDT --- /usr/bin/virtualenvwrapper.sh still doesn't have a shebang and it requires one: python-virtualenvwrapper.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/bin/virtualenvwrapper.sh -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812681] Review Request: GlueMiniSat - Boolean SAT solver that implements literal blocks distance (LBD)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812681
--- Comment #2 from Jerry James 2012-04-17 16:42:32 EDT
---
This review has been produced with the help of fedora-review. Here are a few
additional comments. First, the myname macro serves no useful purpose.
Eliminate it, and replace all uses of %{myname} with %{name}. Second, please
comment on the upstream status of the patches as described here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
C/C++
[x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[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.
[-]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint glueminisat-2.2.5-1.fc18.i686.rpm
glueminisat.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US boolean -> Boolean,
boo lean, boo-lean
glueminisat.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US satisfiability ->
insatiability, advisability
glueminisat.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US learnt -> learn,
learns, learn t
glueminisat.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US nd -> ND, Nd, n
glueminisat.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US unsatisfiable ->
unsatisfied, unjustifiable
glueminisat.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US minisat -> mini sat,
mini-sat, minis at
glueminisat.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary glueminisat
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
rpmlint glueminisat-2.2.5-1.fc18.src.rpm
glueminisat.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US boolean -> Boolean,
boo lean, boo-lean
glueminisat.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US satisfiability ->
insatiability, advisability
glueminisat.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US learnt -> learn,
learns, learn t
glueminisat.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US nd -> ND, Nd, n
glueminisat.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US unsatisfiable ->
unsatisfied, unjustifiable
glueminisat.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US minisat -> mini sat,
mini-sat, minis at
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
rpmlint
[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #6 from Thomas Spura 2012-04-17 16:14:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Sorry Thomas, I think i got my bug numbers crossed. Too many tabs open. Heh, I could also look more into the bug report and not search your name and random spec/srpm links ;) Thanks for correcting... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812681] Review Request: GlueMiniSat - Boolean SAT solver that implements literal blocks distance (LBD)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812681 Jerry James 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 812681] Review Request: GlueMiniSat - Boolean SAT solver that implements literal blocks distance (LBD)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812681 Jerry James 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 812681] Review Request: GlueMiniSat - Boolean SAT solver that implements literal blocks distance (LBD)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812681 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812681] Review Request: GlueMiniSat - Boolean SAT solver that implements literal blocks distance (LBD)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812681 --- Comment #1 from Jerry James 2012-04-17 16:12:49 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 807476] Review Request:ima-evm-utils -IMA/EVM support utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807476
--- Comment #6 from Michael Scherer 2012-04-17 16:10:55 EDT ---
Sorry, was swamped at work.
Since the package is not for EL5 ( i assume kernel would not support it ), I
think you should remove BuildRoot, and %defattr ( that's cleaner to remove
boilerplate, IMHO )
As evm-utils was not in Fedora, I also think the Obsoletes/Provides could be
removed ( I am a cleaning freak, I know ).
COPYING is empty, you should ask upstream to have the complete license.
If NEWS is empty, I think it not needed to ship it.
For the rest, here is the review :
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
C/C++
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[!]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
Note: defattr() present in %files section. This is OK if packaging
for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Licenses found: "*No copyright* UNKNOWN", "LGPL (v2.1) " For
detailed output of licensecheck see file:
/home/misc/checkout/git/FedoraReview/src/807476/licensecheck.txt
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint ima-evm-utils-0.2-1.fc18.i686.rpm
ima-evm-utils.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run
time, run-time, rudiment
ima-evm-utils.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US executables ->
executable, executable s, executrices
ima-evm-utils.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US unauthorised ->
unauthorized, authorized
ima-evm-utils.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filesystem -> file
system, file-system, systemically
ima-evm-utils.i686: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/ima-evm-utils-0.2/COPYING
ima-evm-utils.i686: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/ima-evm-utils-0.2/NEWS
ima-evm-utils.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary evmctl
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 5 warnings.
rpmlint ima-evm-utils-debuginfo-0.2-1.fc18.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint ima-evm-utils-0.2-1.fc18.src.rpm
ima-evm-utils.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudiment
ima-evm-utils.src: W: spelling-error %description
[Bug 813542] Review Request: Pivy - Python binding for Coin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813542 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kwiz...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Richard Shaw 2012-04-17 16:06:23 EDT --- *** Bug 458975 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 --- Comment #5 from Richard Shaw 2012-04-17 16:07:01 EDT --- Sorry Thomas, I think i got my bug numbers crossed. Too many tabs open. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kwiz...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Thomas Spura 2012-04-17 16:00:22 EDT --- *** Bug 458975 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813542] Review Request: Pivy - Python binding for Coin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813542 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=458975 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813542] New: Review Request: Pivy - Python binding for Coin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: Pivy - Python binding for Coin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813542
Summary: Review Request: Pivy - Python binding for Coin
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: hobbes1...@gmail.com
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Story Points: ---
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
SPEC: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/Pivy/Pivy.spec
SRPM: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/Pivy/Pivy-0.5.0-1.hg609.fc16.src.rpm
Description:
Pivy is a Coin binding for Python. Coin is a high-level 3D graphics library
with
a C++ Application Programming Interface. Coin uses scene-graph data structures
to render real-time graphics suitable for mostly all kinds of scientific and
engineering visualization applications.
rpmlint output:
Pivy.src:51: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib
Needed because it doesn't understand /usr/lib{,64}
Pivy.src: W: invalid-url Source0: Pivy-0.5.0-hg609.tar.gz
mecurial checkout, instructions for checkout are in the spec.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Richard Shaw 2012-04-17 15:52:14 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: zipios++ Short Description: C++ library for reading and writing Zip files Owners: hobbes1069 Branches: f16 f17 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 15:54:29 EDT --- Anytime. I don't have any right now, but you could do a Merge 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 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 15:54:49 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 812561] Review Request: python-ipdb - IPython enabled Python debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812561
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura 2012-04-17
15:47:24 EDT ---
Just a few comments/questions:
- Which commit exactly did you package? It would be nice to have that in the
spec instead of HEAD.
(ups... in the changelog, never mind ;))
- Is there a "sane way" of running a test, so that it still works?
(Means, what can I do to ensure, I won't break it with a ipython update...?)
The %check is at the moment useless and nosetests doesn't run automatically
(requires user input)
- Requires: python3-ipython missing, when it'll be ready.
- HISTORY says: "0.7 (unreleased)"
--> Release must be 0.1
- python3-ipython will be there as soon as all dependencies are fullfilled...
(builds and works mostly anyway even right now, but I don't want to ship a
partly broken package)
- Could you please be more specific in %files, so you know when the egg can't
be build?
e.g.
%{python_sitelib}/ipdb/
%{python_sitelib}/ipdb-%{version}*.egg-info/
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 --- Comment #5 from Richard Shaw 2012-04-17 15:51:09 EDT --- Thanks for the review. Let me know if you need one sometime later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 15:44:26 EDT --- Yup, I installed hunspell-pl and it complains about the polish spelling as well. :) Looks great now. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 --- Comment #3 from Richard Shaw 2012-04-17 15:36:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > Good: > > - rpmlint checks return: > > zipios++.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found pl.UTF-8 > A dictionary for the Enchant spell checking library is not available for the > language given in the info message. Spell checking will proceed with > rpmlint's built-in implementation for localized tags in this language. For > better spell checking results in this language, install the appropriate > dictionary that Enchant will use for this language, often for example > hunspell-* or aspell-*. > > Fix. I looked into this, I think this is just telling you that it can't check the spelling because you don't have a Polish dictionary installed. At least this is my interpretation of the error. > zipios++.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm > /usr/share/doc/zipios++-0.1.5.9/COPYING > The file is installed with executable permissions, but was identified as one > that probably should not be executable. Verify if the executable bits are > desired, and remove if not. > > Fix. Oops. I had that fixed locally. Must have fixed it after I copied my stuff to fedorapeople.org. Fixed. > I cannot speak to the accuracy of the Polish, I should ask my dad. . . It was in the package I started with and I didn't see any reason to remove it :) > Otherwise OK. So it's just the rpmlint stuff. I assume the only reason > you're > packaging software with no current upstream is as a dependency? Yup. It's bundled in FreeCAD. Spec URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/zipios/zipios++.spec SRPM URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/zipios/zipios++-0.1.5.9-6.fc16.src.rpm Thanks, Richard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 15:23:17 EDT --- Good: - rpmlint checks return: zipios++.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found pl.UTF-8 A dictionary for the Enchant spell checking library is not available for the language given in the info message. Spell checking will proceed with rpmlint's built-in implementation for localized tags in this language. For better spell checking results in this language, install the appropriate dictionary that Enchant will use for this language, often for example hunspell-* or aspell-*. Fix. zipios++.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/zipios++-0.1.5.9/COPYING The file is installed with executable permissions, but was identified as one that probably should not be executable. Verify if the executable bits are desired, and remove if not. Fix. And several ignorable spelling errors. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( LGPLv2+ ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english I cannot speak to the accuracy of the Polish, I should ask my dad. . . - source matches upstream N/A - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok N/A - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file - devel package ok - no .la files - post/postun ldconfig ok - devel requires base package n-v-r Otherwise OK. So it's just the rpmlint stuff. I assume the only reason you're packaging software with no current upstream is as a dependency? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 --- Comment #3 from Richard Shaw 2012-04-17 15:26:43 EDT --- All fixed! Spec URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/qastools/qastools.spec SRPM URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/qastools/qastools-0.17.1-2.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 812132] Review Request: python-lvm - Python module to use LVM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812132 --- Comment #3 from Andy Grover 2012-04-17 15:18:00 EDT --- Updated. Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/python-lvm.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/python-lvm-1.1-1.fc17.src.rpm changes: - License field was wrong, corrected to LGPLv2+ - New upstream release -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812058] Review Request: zipios++ - C++ library for reading and writing Zip 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=812058 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||limburg...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|limburg...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 15:08:32 EDT --- I'll give this a go. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420
--- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones 2012-04-17
15:02:30 EDT ---
Looking good, just a few things:
- missing scriptlets for the icon cache.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
- you can drop the index.html from the URL, but please use %name/%version
macros in URL, Source, Patch etc where appropriate
- I'd like you to be a little more verbose in the %files section (for the
binaries and desktop files at least) as I think it reads better. Similarly with
the man section although its best to use a wildcard for the extension rather
than .gz
- you also need to use the %find_lang %{name} --with-qt to grab the .qm files
(even though they are under the application dir - its still a must)
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812121] Review Request: python-kmod - Load, unload & list kernel modules from Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812121 --- Comment #2 from Andy Grover 2012-04-17 14:49:14 EDT --- thanks for the informal review. Updated. Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/python-kmod.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/python-kmod-0.1-2.fc17.src.rpm - Updated License field for proper license - Removed explicit dependency - FSF address fixed upstream for next release -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813433] New: Review Request: dt - A generic data test program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dt - A generic data test program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813433 Summary: Review Request: dt - A generic data test program Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: okoz...@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://okozina.fedorapeople.org/dt.spec SRPM URL: http://okozina.fedorapeople.org/dt-16.08-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: dt is a generic data test program used to verify proper operation of peripherals, file systems, device drivers, or any data stream supported by the operating system. In its' simplest mode of operation, dt writes and then verifies its' default data pattern, then displays performance statistics and other test parameters before exiting. Since verification of data is performed, dt can be thought of as a generic diagnostic tool. dt command lines are similar to the dd program, which is popular on most UNIX systems. It contains numerous options to give the user control of various test parameters. dt has been used to successfully test disks, tapes, serial lines, parallel lines, pipes, and memory mapped files. In fact, dt can be used for any device that allows the standard open, read, write, and close system calls. Special support is necessary for some devices, such as serial lines, for setting up the speed, parity, data bits, etc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 Brendan Jones changed: What|Removed |Added CC||brendan.jones...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|brendan.jones...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Brendan Jones 2012-04-17 14:41:45 EDT --- I will take 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 812659] Review Request: par - paragraph reformatter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812659
--- Comment #5 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-04-17
14:23:46 EDT ---
Okay, here are my initial set of comments:
* The following tags are obsolete and need to be removed:
Vendor, Packager
* The following tags are obsolete unless you plan on building for EPEL 5 or
older:
- BuildRoot
* The following items are obsolete unless you plan on building for EPEL 5 or
older:
- "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" at the beginning of %install
- a default %clean section that just contains "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT"
- %defattr(-,root,root,755)
* I strongly advise that you always use macros like "%{buildroot}" instead of
"%buildroot". While it isn't a huge deal in this relatively simple package,
later, you may want to conditionalize macros (e.g. "%{?dist}"), and you will
need to be using that syntax to do that cleanly.
* Please use "Source0" instead of "Source". Source0 should be a full URL to the
upstream provided source tarball, rpm is smart enough to parse that. (Same is
true for Patch1 since upstream provides it)
* In the Source0 URL, please use "%{name}" and "%{version}", so that as you
update the package, that URL can remain relatively static (also prevents you
from accidentally building a package with old source).
* In Release, please seriously consider using "%{?dist}" at the end of the
numeric field. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag
* This code actually has a new license, instead of "Copyright only", please
use:
License: Par
Clean all that up, and I'll come through and do a 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 812538] Review Request: herbstluftwm - 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=812538 --- Comment #1 from Corey Richardson (:Octayn) 2012-04-17 14:10:43 EDT --- Thanks to some input from 'tipps' I've cleaned up the spec a bit. Removed an unnecessary line and made the paths in %files consistent. The new spec is live, and the new SRPM is at http://octayn.net/herbstluftwm-0.3-2.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 813420] New: Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 Summary: Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: hobbes1...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/qastools/qastools.spec SRPM URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/qastools/qastools-0.17.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: QasTools is a collection of desktop applications for the Linux sound system ALSA: QasMixer Desktop mixer for ALSA's "Simple Mixer Interface" (alsamixer). QasHctl Mixer for ALSA's more complex "High level Control Interface". QasConfig Browser for the ALSA configuration tree. No significant rpmlint output. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813420] Review Request: qastools - Collection of desktop applications for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813420 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||805236(FedoraAudio) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813416] New: Review Request: drupal6-views_bonus - miscellaneous features that aren't distributed by Views itself
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal6-views_bonus - miscellaneous features that aren't distributed by Views itself https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813416 Summary: Review Request: drupal6-views_bonus - miscellaneous features that aren't distributed by Views itself Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ansi...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~ansilva/drupal6-views_bonus.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~ansilva/drupal6-views_bonus-1.1-2.fc16.src.rpm Description: This group of modules is sort of a recipe module that makes things easier by showing how to integrate some other modules as well as providing miscellaneous features that aren't distributed by Views itself. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809882] Review Request: ansible - Minimal SSH command and control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809882
--- Comment #3 from Tim Bielawa 2012-04-17 13:30:10 EDT
---
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~tbielawa/ansible/ansible.spec
SRPM URL:
http://people.redhat.com/~tbielawa/ansible/ansible-0.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description:
Ansible is a radically simple model-driven configuration management,
multi-node deployment, and remote task execution system. Ansible works
over SSH and does not require any software or daemons to be installed
on remote nodes. Extension modules can be written in any language and
are transferred to managed machines automatically.
(In reply to comment #1)
> Hi,
>
> a few note :
> - you should explicitely say the version of python to use in BuildRequires
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires
Fixed.
> - the python macro are already defined on Fedora, so no need to add them again
Fixed. Only set if RHEL 5. (We're targeting that in the future)
> - Prefix is forbidden
Fixed.
> - buildRoot should not be used, except for EPEL 5
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
Fixed. Only set if RHEL 5.
> - so does %defattr, %clean and rm in %install
I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you please expand?
> - --record=INSTALLED_FILES is not used, and is not recommended
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Byte_compiling
Removed.
> - it seems that %{_datadir}/ansible/ would end unowned
I think this is fixed now.
> - I am not sure, but I think that "-n %{name}-%{version}" is uneeded, becuase
> tha's the default
Correct. Removed this too.
> - the guideline ask for consistency when using macro to reference path :
> %config(noreplace) /etc/ansible/hosts
> %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/ansible/
Fixed. Consolidated to just "%{_sysconfdir}/ansible"
> - %{_mandir}/man1/*.gz
> that's not mandatory, but I think that's better to not hardcode the prefix
> used
> here, as this could be changed in the future ( ie, be something else than gz )
Adjusted this too.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813414] New: Review Request: drupal6-better_formats - Better formats is a module to add more flexibility to Drupal's core input format system.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal6-better_formats - Better formats is a module to add more flexibility to Drupal's core input format system. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813414 Summary: Review Request: drupal6-better_formats - Better formats is a module to add more flexibility to Drupal's core input format system. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ansi...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~ansilva/drupal6-better_formats.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~ansilva/drupal6-better_formats-1.2-2.fc16.src.rpm Description: Better formats is a module to add more flexibility to Drupal's core input format system. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 812659] Review Request: par - paragraph reformatter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812659 --- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt 2012-04-17 13:08:36 EDT --- Just a brief look at the spec file: * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines In particular, there are these for your reading pleasure: ;) * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Tags * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Macros * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_Permissions * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Using_the_.25.7B.3Fdist.7D_Tag -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 738556] Review Request: gogoc - IPv6 TSP client for gogo6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738556 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System 2012-04-17 12:40:31 EDT --- gogoc-1.2-15.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gogoc-1.2-15.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 738556] Review Request: gogoc - IPv6 TSP client for gogo6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738556 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813397] New: Review Request: perl-v6 - Perl 6 implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-v6 - Perl 6 implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813397 Summary: Review Request: perl-v6 - Perl 6 implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ppi...@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://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-v6/perl-v6.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-v6/perl-v6-0.044-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: The v6 module is a front-end to the "Perlito" compiler. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758166] [EPEL] - Review Request -- thrift 0.6.1
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758166
--- Comment #20 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-04-17
11:37:39 EDT ---
I had to make a minor change to the package to get it to build for EPEL-6:
%if 0%{?rhel} <= 5
BuildRequires: php53-devel
%else
BuildRequires: php-devel
%endif
Let me know if you want me to just do an EPEL review at this point.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on 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 #12 from Fedora Update System 2012-04-17 09:41:26 EDT --- drupal6-addthis-3.0-6.beta2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal6-addthis-3.0-6.beta2.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 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 #11 from Fedora Update System 2012-04-17 09:40:14 EDT --- drupal6-addthis-3.0-6.beta2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal6-addthis-3.0-6.beta2.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 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 changed: What|Removed |Added Component|0x |Package Review AssignedTo|dw...@infradead.org |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #3 from Lukáš Zapletal 2012-04-17 09:33:56 EDT --- Corecting Component setting ;-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dgood...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Lukáš Zapletal 2012-04-17 09:35:47 EDT --- The package is *APPROVED* -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670007] Review Request: ghc-bloomfilter - A fast, space efficient Bloom filter implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670007 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 09:27:33 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 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 --- Comment #25 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 09:28:19 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 738556] Review Request: gogoc - IPv6 TSP client for gogo6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738556 --- Comment #38 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 09:28:48 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 644335] Review Request: rubygem-mustache - Mustache is a framework-agnostic way to render logic-free views
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644335 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla 2012-04-17 09:25:43 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 746215] Review Request: perl-RT-Authen-ExternalAuth - RT Authentication using External Sources
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746215 --- Comment #13 from Xavier Bachelot 2012-04-17 09:19:52 EDT --- Can anyone please kindly grant me access to the EL5 branch ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813306] New: Review Request: accerciser - Interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: accerciser - Interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813306 Summary: Review Request: accerciser - Interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: kalevlem...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/accerciser.spec SRPM URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/accerciser-3.4.1-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: Accerciser is an interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop. It uses AT-SPI to inspect and control widgets, allowing you to check if an application is providing correct information to assistive technologies and automated test frameworks. Accerciser has a simple plugin framework which you can use to create custom views of accessibility information. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744066] Review Request: vide - programmer's terminal for vim
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=744066 Lukáš Zapletal changed: What|Removed |Added CC||heday...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Lukáš Zapletal 2012-04-17 08:37:19 EDT --- @Amir - sorry I did not respond, notification email was filtered due to incorrect setting on my side. Will work on your remarks, thank you! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 #122 from Brett Lentz 2012-04-17 08:31:23 EDT --- Updated my spec and SRPM to fix the fastthread logic. URLs are unchanged. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644335] Review Request: rubygem-mustache - Mustache is a framework-agnostic way to render logic-free views
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644335 Vít Ondruch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vondr...@redhat.com Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Vít Ondruch 2012-04-17 07:43:57 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rubygem-mustache New Branches: el6 Owners: vondruch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 --- Comment #24 from Matthias Clasen 2012-04-17 07:59:34 EDT --- You should be all set with commit access. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 Andrea Veri changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrea.v...@gmail.com Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #23 from Andrea Veri 2012-04-17 07:56:29 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: itstool New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: averi InitialCC: averi I'll help mclasen maintaining itstool in both EL5 and EL6. He'll soon confirm my commit accesses on the relevant git branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670007] Review Request: ghc-bloomfilter - A fast, space efficient Bloom filter implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670007 Lakshmi Narasimhan changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Lakshmi Narasimhan 2012-04-17 07:24:51 EDT --- Thanks for the review. Uploaded the latest spec. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-bloomfilter Short Description: A fast, space efficient Bloom filter implementation Owners: narasim Branches: f16 f17 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930 Martin Erik Werner changed: What|Removed |Added Component|0x |Package Review AssignedTo|dw...@infradead.org |nob...@fedoraproject.org Bug 800930 depends on bug 739313, which changed state. Bug 739313 Summary: enet is outdated https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739313 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #40 from Martin Erik Werner 2012-04-17 07:11:36 EDT --- Reverting spurious Bug 553189 - mis-assignment to 0x -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #23 from Jens Petersen 2012-04-17 06:07:16 EDT --- Thanks! The no-ifelse patch looks pretty simple. :) https://github.com/joeyh/git-annex/commits/no-ifelse -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 786071] Review Request: ghc-feldspar-language - Functional Embedded Language for DSP and PARallelism
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786071 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||NotReady -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670007] Review Request: ghc-bloomfilter - A fast, space efficient Bloom filter implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670007 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|Ready | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670007] Review Request: ghc-bloomfilter - A fast, space efficient Bloom filter implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670007
Jens Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Jens Petersen 2012-04-17 05:53:51 EDT
---
Thanks for updating the package.
> http://narasim.fedorapeople.org/ghc-bloomfilter.spec
(BTW I think you maybe forgot to upload the new .spec file.)
Here is review using the fedora-review package template.
(We should really add a haskell check module.)
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
C/C++
[x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[-]: MUST Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if
present.
Note: ghc-bloomfilter-1.2.6.8-1.fc18.i686.rpm :
/usr/lib/ghc-7.4.1/bloomfilter-1.2.6.8/libHSbloomfilter-1.2.6.8-ghc7.4.1.so
[-]: MUST Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[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 -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[-]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint ghc-bloomfilter-1.2.6.8-1.fc18.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint ghc-bloomfilter-devel-1.2.6.8-1.fc18.i686.rpm
ghc-bloomfilter-devel.i686: W: obsolete-not-provided ghc-bloomfilter-doc
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
-- this is ok
rpmlint ghc-bloomfilter-1.2.6.8-1.fc18.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/petersen/pkgreview/ghc-bloomfilter/670007/bloomfilter-1.2.6.7.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : None
MD5SUM upstream package : 97ce543f074e6acca938514555a34c9a
c6bd1eec063b3142171e7fee6611df3c bloomfilter-1.2.6.8.tar.gz
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: M
[Bug 705382] Review Request: sympa - Mailing list 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=705382 --- Comment #5 from Xavier Bachelot 2012-04-17 05:54:48 EDT --- There is some good stuff to take from the spec file from sympa-ja.org. There are also things that I don't like and won't pass a review anyway. All in all, the spec files are very different and it's not straight forward to merge them, although we talked briefly together about that a few months ago. Meanwhile, here's an update for the latest release : Spec URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SPECS/sympa.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SRPMS/sympa-6.1.9-1.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 738556] Review Request: gogoc - IPv6 TSP client for gogo6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738556 Juan Orti Alcaine 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 738556] Review Request: gogoc - IPv6 TSP client for gogo6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738556 --- Comment #37 from Juan Orti Alcaine 2012-04-17 05:16:47 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: gogoc Short Description: IPv6 TSP client for gogo6 Owners: jorti 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 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 #121 from Vít Ondruch 2012-04-17 04:44:07 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #120)
> Updated my spec and SRPM to fix the Requires. URLs are unchanged.
Hi Bret, the condition for fastthread should be "%if 0%{?rhel} <= 6 &&
0%{?fedora} <= 16". Thank you.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772432] Review Request: gnome-applet-sensors - GNOME panel applet for hardware sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772432 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #15 from Jens Petersen 2012-04-17 04:39:29 EDT --- Thanks for pushing the update for f17: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-5972/gnome-applet-sensors-3.0.0-1.fc17 But could you please import the reviewed srpm and also fix the issues pointed out in the review in pkg scm. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813197] Review Request: python-django-devserver - Drop-in replacement for Django's runserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813197 Tomas Radej changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||tra...@redhat.com QAContact|extras...@fedoraproject.org |tra...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Tomas Radej 2012-04-17 04:21:09 EDT --- Taking it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813197] Review Request: python-django-devserver - Drop-in replacement for Django's runserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813197 Tomas Radej changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tra...@redhat.com QAContact|tra...@redhat.com |extras...@fedoraproject.org -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 813197] New: Review Request: python-django-devserver - Drop-in replacement for Django's runserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-django-devserver - Drop-in replacement for Django's runserver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813197 Summary: Review Request: python-django-devserver - Drop-in replacement for Django's runserver Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bkab...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/django-devserver/python-django-devserver.spec SRPM URL: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/django-devserver/python-django-devserver-0.3.1-1.fc17.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3997431 Description: A drop in replacement for Django's built-in runserver command. Features include: - An extendable interface for handling things such as real-time logging. - Integration with the werkzeug interactive debugger. - Threaded (default) and multi-process development servers. - Ability to specify a WSGI application as your target environment. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
