[Bug 838780] New: Review Request: ghc-shakespeare-text - Interpolation with quasi-quotation: put variables into strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838780 Bug ID: 838780 QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org Severity: medium Version: rawhide Priority: medium CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Summary: Review Request: ghc-shakespeare-text - Interpolation with quasi-quotation: put variables into strings Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: maths...@gmail.com Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-shakespeare-text/ghc-shakespeare-text.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-shakespeare-text/ghc-shakespeare-text-1.0.0.2-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Interpolation with quasi-quotation: stick haskell variables into haskell strings. Note there is no dependency on haskell-src-extras. If you don't mind that dependency, you may want to look at using these packages: Interpolation, interpolatedstring-perl6, interpolatedstring-qq. This package has 1 other general feature that those others may not (but would be easy to duplicate): instead of using quasi-quoting you can also use an external file. It also has url/embeding interpolation, with \@ and \^, which are used in Yesod. This package also uses blaze-builder for efficiently constructing strings (I am not sure what the other packages use). This might be of interest to you for large templates or performance sensitive code, or otherwise having a nice interface to blaze-builder. Shakespeare is a template family for type-safe, efficient templates with simple variable interpolation . Shakespeare templates can be used inline with a quasi-quoter or in an external file. Shakespeare interpolates variables according to the type being inserted. In this case, the variable type needs a ToText instance. Please see http://docs.yesodweb.com/book/templates for a more thorough description and examples of the shakespeare family of template languages. Fedora Account System Username: mathstuf % lintmock fedora-rawhide-x86_64 ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US haskell - Haskell ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US src - arc, sec, sic ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US interpolatedstring - interpolated string, interpolated-string, interpolating ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qq - q, sqq, sq ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US url - URL, curl, purl ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US embeding - embedding, bedimming, bedding ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US quoter - quote, quotes, quoted ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: strange-permission shakespeare-text-1.0.0.2.tar.gz 0640L ghc-shakespeare-text.src: W: strange-permission ghc-shakespeare-text.spec 0640L ghc-shakespeare-text.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US haskell - Haskell ghc-shakespeare-text.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US src - arc, sec, sic ghc-shakespeare-text.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US interpolatedstring - interpolated string, interpolated-string, interpolating ghc-shakespeare-text.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qq - q, sqq, sq ghc-shakespeare-text.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US url - URL, curl, purl ghc-shakespeare-text.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US embeding - embedding, bedimming, bedding ghc-shakespeare-text.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US quoter - quote, quotes, quoted ghc-shakespeare-text-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US haskell - Haskell ghc-shakespeare-text-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US interpolatedstring - interpolated string, interpolated-string, interpolating ghc-shakespeare-text-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qq - q, sqq, sq ghc-shakespeare-text-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US url - URL, curl, purl ghc-shakespeare-text-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US embeding - embedding, bedimming, bedding ghc-shakespeare-text-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US quoter - quote, quotes, quoted 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 22 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838780] Review Request: ghc-shakespeare-text - Interpolation with quasi-quotation: put variables into strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838780 Ben Boeckel maths...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||haskell-devel@lists.fedorap ||roject.org Blocks||634048 ||(Haskell-pkg-reviews) Alias||ghc-shakespeare-text -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838780] Review Request: ghc-shakespeare-text - Interpolation with quasi-quotation: put variables into strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838780 Ben Boeckel maths...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||827975 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 832353] Review Request: perl-Net-Dropbox-API - A dropbox API interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832353 --- Comment #4 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Net-Dropbox-API Short Description: A dropbox API interface Owners: cheeselee Branches: f16 f17 InitialCC: perl-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 822046] Review Request: exfat - Free exFAT file system implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822046 --- Comment #10 from vasc...@gmail.com --- Thanks to all. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767649] [EPEL] - Review Request -- lcm 0.7.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767649 --- Comment #25 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de --- (In reply to comment #22) Oops, I didn't realise Nelson needed a sponsor. I think in that case the review is supposed to be done by the sponsor. But since this one is done now, I will reset the fedora-review+ flag, unless Matthias has any objections? Hi Dan, yes, Nelson was unaware, he needed a sponsor for EPEL, too. Since his other package review requests don't look bad, I've sponsored him. Package guidelines are saying, the first review must be done from a sponsor; in practice, this is often handled as in this case. Dan, you did a good and solid job in this review, so I don't see a requirement, to do that again for myself. Thank you! Nelson, just go ahead. If you want Dan as co-maintainer, too, you should insert a new Package SCM request. Only the last request will be handled. @Pingou Regarding re-setting all kinds of flags and assignments, I'm currently suspecting some kind of JavaScript blocker, but this is just a working thesis. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838675] Review Request: python-beautifulsoup4 - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838675 --- Comment #6 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- I will review this package -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838675] Review Request: python-beautifulsoup4 - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838675 Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838675] Review Request: python-beautifulsoup4 - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838675 Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838675] Review Request: python-beautifulsoup4 - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838675 Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|negativ...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838675] Review Request: python-beautifulsoup4 - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838675
--- Comment #7 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[!]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[-]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[!]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: 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 Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[-]: 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 License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint python-beautifulsoup4-4.1.1-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
python-beautifulsoup4.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-html5lib
python-beautifulsoup4.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python3-html5lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint python-beautifulsoup4-4.1.1-1.fc17.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint python3-beautifulsoup4-4.1.1-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
python3-beautifulsoup4.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided python3-BeautifulSoup
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/slaanesh/Documents/fedora/838675/beautifulsoup4-4.1.1.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : fccee58b4d914fb489385d672fe89f43
MD5SUM upstream package : fccee58b4d914fb489385d672fe89f43
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
[Bug 838675] Review Request: python-beautifulsoup4 - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838675
--- Comment #8 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint python-beautifulsoup4-4.1.1-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
python-beautifulsoup4.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-html5lib
python-beautifulsoup4.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python3-html5lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
This can be ignored, rpmlint grabs the lib in the package name.
[!]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
[!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean
[!]: 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
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
See: None
All of this can be ignored if you're planning also to build for EPEL 5,
otherwise please remove all the old directives.
[!]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
[!]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
The package itself is built correctly as it does include the text license file
in the package but the license itself is MIT (see COPYING.txt and project's
website) and not BSD as stated in the spec file.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838675] Review Request: python-beautifulsoup4 - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838675 --- Comment #9 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- %package -n python3-beautifulsoup4 Obsoletes: python3-BeautifulSoup 1:4.1.0-1 I can't find python3-BeautifulSoup 1:4.1.0-1 in the Fedora packages, the last version in Fedora is 1:3.2.1-1: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=301717 What is your plan for the updates? Do you plan to introduce the package also for Fedora 16/17 thus obsoleting the package already in stable? Does it produce any breakage? Apart from these small issues the package looks good. Regards, --Simone -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710383] Review Request: Agda - Commandline for dependently typed functional language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710383 Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||shakthim...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|shakthim...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #43 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- Created attachment 597228 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597228action=edit Patch against *-10 This patch is the diff of my local version against Martin's *-10. It actually consists of 3 patches: 1. Makefile.am: - Install missing headers. - Don't ship generated FreeSolid.pc 2. FreeSolid.pc: - Use -I.../FreeSOLID. - Pull in qhull 3. freesolid-config: - Revert changes to usage. - Fix --version handling (pkg-config --version returns the version of pkg-config, --modversion the version of the module) Remark: I (Fedora maintainer of qhull) added a qhull.pc to Fedora's qhull, yesterday. RPMS with qhull.pc added have been submitted, but are still stuck in Fedora's package delay queue (For reasons I do not understand, they have not even made it into testing). Until these packages have landed in Fedora's public repos, FreeSOLID can not assume qhull to provide qhull.pc. Once these have landed, FreeSOLID should be changed to use qhull's qhull.pc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838780] Review Request: ghc-shakespeare-text - Interpolation with quasi-quotation: put variables into strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838780 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- I think the description is probably too verbose and could be cropped a bit but of course looks fine so far. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838780] Review Request: ghc-shakespeare-text - Interpolation with quasi-quotation: put variables into strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838780 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||Ready -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838801] New: Review Request: rubygem-ref - Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838801 Bug ID: 838801 QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org Severity: medium Version: rawhide Priority: medium CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Summary: Review Request: rubygem-ref - Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: vondr...@redhat.com Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-ref.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-ref-1.0.0-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby that work across multiple runtimes (MRI, REE, YARV, Jruby, Rubinius, and IronRuby). Also includes implementation of maps/hashes that use references and a reference queue. Fedora Account System Username: vondruch Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4229359 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838801] Review Request: rubygem-ref - Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838801 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||bkab...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bkab...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838801] Review Request: rubygem-ref - Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838801 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com --- I am very disappointed, as I couldn't find anything wrong and I have to approve the package right away. This package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710383] Review Request: Agda - Commandline for dependently typed functional language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710383 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard|NotReady|Ready --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- Ok finally: Spec: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/Agda/Agda.spec SRPM: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/Agda/Agda-2.3.0.1-1.fc17.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4229387 Builds for me in F17 too locally. I need to check if it needs Requires: ghc-Agda-devel too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252
--- Comment #83 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com ---
(In reply to comment #82)
(In reply to comment #80)
export ACLOCAL_FLAGS=-I /usr/local/share/aclocal/
export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig/:/usr/local/share/pkgconfig/
export PYTHONPATH=${PYTHONPATH}:/usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/
This would mean the package is improperly packaged or the tarball being
incomplete. All external files a package uses during builts must ether be
provided by the tarball or be pulled in by build-deps.
The error you are complaining about is nothing to do with cinnamon, Please keep
your comments limited to this review and the review process!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #84 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com --- (In reply to comment #81) Leigh, I sent you an email. I'm finding MATE and Cinnamon to be quite similar in the way they were written and the way they are built. I have just started finished building the first RPM for MATE (mate-common-1.2.2). I feel like it may be useful to you. You can find my spec file here: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/mate-common.spec Not that it's perfect or anything but rpmbuild -ba, -bi, -bs completes and rpmlint gives me 0 errors. Please take a look and respond here or in my email. Hope this helps. Dan Mate has been packaged already, see the link below for details. http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=276286 Here's his email address. Wolfgang Ulbrich i...@raveit.de -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #44 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Thanks. It's a pleasure to work with you... Noting the Name: is still 'Free Solid' Another finding: the library name is libFreeSOLID-2.1.1.so.0*, not the expected libFreeSOLID.so.0*. The build works, linking against the libFreeSOLID.so symlink from -devel. But what happens then in runtime, without -devel? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838801] Review Request: rubygem-ref - Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838801 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #1) I am very disappointed, as I couldn't find anything wrong and I have to approve the package right away. I am deeply sorry :) This package is APPROVED. Thank you! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-ref Short Description: Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby Owners: vondruch Branches: InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #45 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- The build is the build of speed-dreams, the upcoming client... Maybe you could attach qhull.pc in this bug, just to shortcut testing until the update hit the repos? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838722] Review Request: port-allocator-maven-plugin - Port Allocator Maven Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838722 Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mizde...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mizde...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com --- I am taking this review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767649] [EPEL] - Review Request -- lcm 0.7.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767649 --- Comment #26 from Nelson Marques nmo.marq...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: lcm Short Description: Lightweight communications and marshaling Owners: nmarques mrunge dcallagh Branches: el5 el6 InitialCC: Add Dan Callaghan as co-maintainer please. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838722] Review Request: port-allocator-maven-plugin - Port Allocator Maven Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838722
--- Comment #2 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[!]: 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 License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint port-allocator-maven-plugin-1.2-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
port-allocator-maven-plugin.noarch: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint port-allocator-maven-plugin-javadoc-1.2-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
port-allocator-maven-plugin-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US)
Javadocs - Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint port-allocator-maven-plugin-1.2-1.fc18.src.rpm
port-allocator-maven-plugin.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
port-allocator-maven-plugin-1.2.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
These warnings can be ignored.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[!]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[?]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: SHOULD %check is present
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #46 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 597255 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597255action=edit Don't encode version in library name Set library name to FreeSOLID instead of FreeSOLID-2.1.1. See also http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook_88.html, look for -release -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 749291] Review Request: dpm-xrootd - xroot interface to the Disk Pool Manager (DPM)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=749291 Ricardo Rocha rocha.po...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Ricardo Rocha rocha.po...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: dpm-xrootd Short Description: xroot interface to the Disk Pool Manager (DPM) Owners: rocha Branches: InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838540] Review Request: gfal2-plugin-xrootd - Provides xrootd access for GFAL2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838540 David Cameron d.g.came...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||d.g.came...@gmail.com Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) --- Comment #1 from David Cameron d.g.came...@gmail.com --- Link to SRPM compatible with EPEL 5: https://dcameron.web.cern.ch/dcameron/dev/rpmbuild/SRPMS/gfal2-plugin-xrootd-0.1.0-1.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838870] New: Review Request: rubygem-therubyracer - Embed the V8 Javascript interpreter into Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838870 Bug ID: 838870 QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org Severity: medium Version: rawhide Priority: medium CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Summary: Review Request: rubygem-therubyracer - Embed the V8 Javascript interpreter into Ruby Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: bkab...@redhat.com Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/therubyracer/rubygem-therubyracer.spec SRPM URL: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/therubyracer/rubygem-therubyracer-0.11.0-0.1.beta5.fc17.src.rpm Description: Call javascript code and manipulate javascript objects from ruby. Call ruby code and manipulate ruby objects from javascript. Fedora Account System Username: bkabrda -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838801] Review Request: rubygem-ref - Library that implements weak, soft, and strong references in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838801 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||838870 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838870] Review Request: rubygem-therubyracer - Embed the V8 Javascript interpreter into Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838870 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||838801 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838870] Review Request: rubygem-therubyracer - Embed the V8 Javascript interpreter into Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838870 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||vondr...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- I'll take it for a review -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838720] Review Request: ttfautohint - Autohinting-tool for truetype fonts - FE-NEEDSPONSOR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838720 Vinzenz Vietzke viet...@b1-systems.de changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: ttfautohint |Review Request: ttfautohint |- Autohinting-tool for |- Autohinting-tool for |truetype fonts |truetype fonts - ||FE-NEEDSPONSOR -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838720] Review Request: ttfautohint - Autohinting-tool for truetype fonts - FE-NEEDSPONSOR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838720 Vinzenz Vietzke viet...@b1-systems.de changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) --- Comment #1 from Vinzenz Vietzke viet...@b1-systems.de --- As this is my first package submission I'd be happy to get someone sponsoring me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 825750] Review Request: tiles - Java templating framework for web application user interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825750 Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 825750] Review Request: tiles - Java templating framework for web application user interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825750 Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710383] Review Request: Agda - Commandline for dependently typed functional language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710383 --- Comment #3 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com --- Even though the hackage page doesn't mention it, the Agda stdlib are required for Agda-executable: http://wiki.portal.chalmers.se/agda/agda.php?n=Libraries.StandardLibrary These need to be made available for use with the command line tool. For example, in the following example the IO module is provided by the Agda stdlib: === TEST CODE === open import IO main : _ main = run (putStrLn Hello world!) === END === Gentoo (for example) has an ebuild for the same: http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/sci-mathematics/agda-stdlib/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785371] Review request: speed-dreams - The Open Racing Car Simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785371 --- Comment #38 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 597314 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597314action=edit pkgconfig.patch update Updated with parts of Ralf's patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785371] Review request: speed-dreams - The Open Racing Car Simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785371 --- Comment #39 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 597315 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597315action=edit freesolid.config.patch update Updated w parts of Ralf's patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #597182|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #47 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 597316 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597316action=edit pkgconfig.patch update Upadted with parts of Ralf's patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #49 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- (In reply to comment #45) The build is the build of speed-dreams, the upcoming client... Maybe you could attach qhull.pc in this bug, just to shortcut testing until the update hit the repos? You can retrieve them from Fedora's git rsp. from the src.rpms below http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=3688 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #48 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 597317 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597317action=edit freesolid.config.patch update Updated with parts of Ralf's patch. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785371] Review request: speed-dreams - The Open Racing Car Simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785371 --- Comment #40 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- PLease ignore comment #38 and #39 and their attachments. They were aimed for FreeSOLID (!) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #50 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 597318 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597318action=edit Remaining parts of Rallf's patch + my patch in comment #39 - Makefile.am This is a new patch (patch8?) The spec file link has expired. Martin: would you possibly consider using another hosting service? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #597317|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #51 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 597320 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597320action=edit freesolid.config.patch update (right patch!) Updated with parts of Ralf's patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838870] Review Request: rubygem-therubyracer - Embed the V8 Javascript interpreter into Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838870
--- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
* Rename %{fedorarel} to %{release}
- Not a show stopper, but the %{release} macro is supported by
rpmdev-bumpspec,
so the updated release is not appended at the end of Release string.
* The Rakefile shouldn't be executable comment is misleading
- Since the file is not executable, but you are just removing shebang
Nonetheless, these are just minor nits, so I'll approve the package as soon as
the rubygem-ref is available in the Rawhide and I'll be able to test the Koji
build (it builds just fine locally).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838901] New: Review Request: autotest - Framework for fully automated testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838901 Bug ID: 838901 QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org Severity: medium Version: rawhide Priority: unspecified CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Summary: Review Request: autotest - Framework for fully automated testing Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: mkri...@redhat.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://mkrizek.fedorapeople.org/autotest.spec SRPM URL: http://mkrizek.fedorapeople.org/autotest-0.14.2-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: Autotest is a framework for fully automated testing Fedora Account System Username: mkrizek I worked with upstream developers to make Autotest more packaging friendly and *a lot* of patches has been pushed upstream, however, there is a one patchset included in the spec file that is already upstream but hasn't been included in the latest release. The rest of the spec file patches are packaging only. Autotest web frontend depends on Google Web Toolkit devel package (gwt-devel) and since gwt-devel is not in official Fedora repository, the web frontend was moved to autotest-web subpackage that is built only when --with gwt. I opened an issue on upstream bug tracker to discuss adding man pages: https://github.com/autotest/autotest/issues/445 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #597318|0 |1 is patch|| Attachment #597318|application/octet-stream|text/plain mime type|| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838901] Review Request: autotest - Framework for fully automated testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838901 Martin Krizek mkri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jla...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Martin Krizek mkri...@redhat.com --- *** Bug 548522 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #597320|0 |1 is patch|| Attachment #597320|application/octet-stream|text/plain mime type|| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #597316|0 |1 is patch|| Attachment #597316|application/octet-stream|text/plain mime type|| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823835] Review Request: serp - Bytecode manipulation framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823835 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mgold...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgold...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com --- I'll take this one. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 836362] Review Request: rubygem-cinch - An IRC Bot Building Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=836362 --- Comment #10 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-cinch Short Description: An IRC Bot Building Framework Owners: mcpierce Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: mcpierce -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823170] Review Request: leveldb - A fast and lightweight key/value database library by Google
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823170 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jdie...@lesbg.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jdie...@lesbg.com --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com --- Taking this as it's also needed for ceph. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838621] Review Request: perl-ServiceNow-API - ServiceNow API for accessing the Service-now platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838621 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lkund...@v3.sk Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838621] Review Request: perl-ServiceNow-API - ServiceNow API for accessing the Service-now platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838621
--- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk ---
* Correctly named
* Packing latest version
* License is correctly specified and a free license
* SPEC file clean and legible
- Distribution link broken!
CPAN one does not exist: http://search.cpan.org/dist/ServiceNow-API/
Did you mean this? http://wiki.servicenow.com/index.php?title=Perl_API
- Unpacking fails, since the zifile contains a __MACOSX/ toplevel directory:
+ /usr/bin/unzip -qq
/home/lkundrak/rpmbuild/SOURCES/ServiceNow-Perl-API.zip
replace __MACOSX/ServiceNow-1.01/._.DS_Store? [y]es, [n]o, [A]ll,
[N]one, [r]ename:
You may want to use the following %prep instead to add a level in
hierarchy
%setup -q -c -n %{name}-%{version}
%setup -D -T -q -n %{name}-%{version}/ServiceNow-%{version}
- You're missing a BR for testing: BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage)
- POD tests fail if coverage test module is installed:
t/pod-coverage.t .. 1/19
# Failed test 'Pod coverage on ServiceNow'
# at /usr/share/perl5/Test/Pod/Coverage.pm line 126.
# Coverage for ServiceNow is 96.4%, with 1 naked subroutine:
# createNotification
- Empty %doc
You may want to include README, etc.
- Rebuild for 5.16 in changelog?
You may want to remove that.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823862] Review Request: bval - Apache Bean Validation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823862 Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mizde...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mizde...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com --- I am taking this review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823847] Review Request: simple-jndi - A JNDI implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823847 Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mizde...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mizde...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com --- I am taking this review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823847] Review Request: simple-jndi - A JNDI implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823847 Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838621] Review Request: perl-ServiceNow-API - ServiceNow API for accessing the Service-now platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838621 --- Comment #2 from Marek Mahut mma...@redhat.com --- Thank you for your comments. New SRPM http://mmahut.fedorapeople.org/reviews/perl-ServiceNow-API/perl-ServiceNow-API-1.01-2.el6.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838621] Review Request: perl-ServiceNow-API - ServiceNow API for accessing the Service-now platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838621 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk --- Looks wonderful, Marek. This package is a pure act of beauty. Even builds cleanly in mock! May God bless you and your family! http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4230253 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4230247 This is happily APPROVED by me! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823847] Review Request: simple-jndi - A JNDI implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823847 --- Comment #3 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com --- Fails to build in mock because some tests fail. [junit] Running org.osjava.sj.memory.SharedMemoryTest [junit] Testsuite: org.osjava.sj.memory.SharedMemoryTest [junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Time elapsed: 0.071 sec [junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Time elapsed: 0.071 sec [junit] [junit] Testcase: testSharedMemory took 0.018 sec [junit] Testcase: testSjn73 took 0.011 sec [junit] Caused an ERROR [junit] Invalid subcontext 'path' in context '' [junit] javax.naming.NamingException: Invalid subcontext 'path' in context '' [junit] at org.osjava.sj.jndi.AbstractContext.lookup(AbstractContext.java:273) [junit] at org.osjava.sj.jndi.AbstractContext.lookup(AbstractContext.java:305) [junit] at javax.naming.InitialContext.lookup(InitialContext.java:411) [junit] at org.osjava.sj.jndi.DelegatingContext.lookup(DelegatingContext.java:60) [junit] at javax.naming.InitialContext.lookup(InitialContext.java:411) [junit] at org.osjava.sj.memory.SharedMemoryTest.testSjn73(SharedMemoryTest.java:93) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838621] Review Request: perl-ServiceNow-API - ServiceNow API for accessing the Service-now platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838621 Marek Mahut mma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Marek Mahut mma...@redhat.com --- Thank you Lubomir. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-ServiceNow-API Short Description: ServiceNow API for accessing the Service-now platform Owners: mmahut Branches: f16 f17 el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823170] Review Request: leveldb - A fast and lightweight key/value database library by Google
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823170 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com --- [jonathan@jdlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint leveldb.spec leveldb.spec: W: patch-not-applied Patch3: leveldb-0003-Woarkaround-for-PowerPC-bloom-test-FIXME.patch 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [jonathan@jdlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/leveldb-1.5.0-1.fc17.src.rpm leveldb.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch3: leveldb-0003-Woarkaround-for-PowerPC-bloom-test-FIXME.patch 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [jonathan@jdlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/leveldb-1.5.0-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm leveldb.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libleveldb.so.1.0.5 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [jonathan@jdlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/leveldb-devel-1.5.0-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm leveldb-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. The only difference with what you saw is the fact that you're no longer applying Patch3. Whenever you push out your next release, please either apply it or remove it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819264] Review Request: Singular - Computer Algebra System for polynomial computations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819264
--- Comment #27 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com ---
rdieter, maybe the fedora-cvs request was not yet processed because you did not
do a full fedora-review :-) The package is mine, so, not changing the generated
review:
$ fedora-review -b 819264
Processing review bug : 819264
Getting .spec and .srpm Urls from bug report : 819264
Downloading .spec and .srpm files
Building /home/pcpa/819264/Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm using mock
fedora-rawhide-i386
INFO: mock.py version 1.1.23 starting...
Start: init plugins
INFO: selinux enabled
Finish: init plugins
Start: run
INFO: Start(/home/pcpa/819264/Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm)
Config(fedora-rawhide-i386)
Start: lock buildroot
Start: clean chroot
INFO: chroot (/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386) unlocked and deleted
Finish: clean chroot
Finish: lock buildroot
Start: chroot init
Start: lock buildroot
Mock Version: 1.1.23
INFO: Mock Version: 1.1.23
INFO: calling preinit hooks
INFO: enabled root cache
Start: unpacking root cache
Finish: unpacking root cache
INFO: enabled yum cache
Start: cleaning yum metadata
Finish: cleaning yum metadata
INFO: enabled ccache
Start: device setup
Finish: device setup
Start: yum update
Finish: yum update
Finish: lock buildroot
Finish: chroot init
INFO: Installed packages:
Start: build phase for Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm
Start: device setup
Finish: device setup
Start: build setup for Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm
Finish: build setup for Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm
Start: rpmbuild -bb Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm
Finish: rpmbuild -bb Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm
Finish: build phase for Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm
INFO: Done(/home/pcpa/819264/Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.src.rpm)
Config(fedora-rawhide-i386) 6 minutes 16 seconds
INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result
Finish: run
Build completed ok
Downloading (Source0):
http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/ftp/pub/Math/Singular/SOURCES/3-1-3/Singular-3-1-3-3.tar.gz
Running checks and generate report
Checking source md5 : /home/pcpa/819264/Singular-3-1-3-3.tar.gz
Review in: /home/pcpa/819264/Singular-review.txt
and the Singular-review.txt:
---%---
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)
[ ]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[ ]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[ ]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[!]: MUST Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if
present.
Note: Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.i686.rpm : /usr/lib/Singular/dbmsr.so
Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.i686.rpm :
/usr/lib/Singular/p_Procs_FieldGeneral.so Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.i686.rpm
: /usr/lib/Singular/p_Procs_FieldIndep.so Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.i686.rpm
: /usr/lib/Singular/p_Procs_FieldQ.so Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.i686.rpm :
/usr/lib/Singular/p_Procs_FieldZp.so Singular-3.1.3-6.fc18.i686.rpm :
/usr/lib/libsingular.so
[ ]: MUST Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
Generic
[ ]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[ ]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[ ]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[ ]: 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
[ ]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[ ]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[ ]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[ ]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: 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
[Bug 831705] Review Request: jj - A FIFO and file-system based Jabber/XMPP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=831705 --- Comment #6 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #5) Looks good, Petr! This package is APPROVED. Thanks, Dan! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 831705] Review Request: jj - A FIFO and file-system based Jabber/XMPP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=831705 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jj Short Description: A FIFO and file-system based Jabber/XMPP client Owners: psabata Branches: f16 f17 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823170] Review Request: leveldb - A fast and lightweight key/value database library by Google
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823170
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com ---
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.
[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.
[!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST 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 Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[-]: 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 License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/jonathan/rpmbuild/SPECS/823170/leveldb-1.5.0.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 6797e19a0a9f9bb1c1ba356bf89227f0
MD5SUM upstream package : 6797e19a0a9f9bb1c1ba356bf89227f0
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[?]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[!]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[-]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[?]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use
[Bug 819264] Review Request: Singular - Computer Algebra System for polynomial computations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819264
Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #28 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org ---
(In reply to comment #27)
rdieter, maybe the fedora-cvs request was not yet processed because you did
not do a full fedora-review :-) The package is mine, so, not changing the
generated review:
It can take a few days till the cvs request is processed.
Just keep calm and wait a bit till it's done :)
What package owns %{singulardir}/ by the way?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823847] Review Request: simple-jndi - A JNDI implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823847 --- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- strange here don't happen http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4230442 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #85 from Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com --- I've been in contact with Wolfgang. It's not formally packaged. I guess you didn't find my comments helpful. Ok. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838971] New: Review request: znc-colloquypush - ZNC module that pushes priv messages and hilights to Colloquy Mobile
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838971 Bug ID: 838971 QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: 17 Priority: unspecified CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Summary: Review request: znc-colloquypush - ZNC module that pushes priv messages and hilights to Colloquy Mobile Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: mza...@redhat.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://v3.sk/~hexo/rpm/znc-colloquypush.spec SRPM URL: http://v3.sk/~hexo/rpm/znc-colloquypush-1.1-1.src.rpm Description: ZNC module that pushes priv messages and hilights to Colloquy Mobile. thank you :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819264] Review Request: Singular - Computer Algebra System for polynomial computations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819264
--- Comment #29 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com ---
Ops, you are right, when slitting file by file and dir by dir in subpackages I
forgot a %dir %{singulardir} in the main package, I think not required to
upload a new srpm, but already edited my local spec to fix it.
Ok, I am calm now :-) and started porting the current sage 5.0.1 package to
sage-5.2.beta0 :-)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #571351|0 |1 is patch|| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739088] Review Request: arandr - Simple GTK+ XRandR GUI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739088 --- Comment #14 from Maros Zatko mza...@redhat.com --- so let's continue this saga: SRPM: http://v3.sk/~hexo/rpm/arandr-0.1.6-1.fc17.src.rpm SPEC: http://v3.sk/~hexo/rpm/arandr.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 833333] Review request: cxf - Apache CXF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=83 --- Comment #3 from Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://dreamertan.fedorapeople.org/srpm/cxf/2.4.8-1.fc17/cxf.spec SRPM URL: http://dreamertan.fedorapeople.org/srpm/cxf/2.4.8-1.fc17/cxf-2.4.8-1.fc17.src.rpm Issues: 1, 2: bloody file turned out to be in macintosh encoding ;) 3: ops, fixed 4: not necessary, these subpackages all depend on main package 5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4230657 Notes: 1, 4. Updated to 2.4.8; unfortunately apache master server doesn't keep older bugfix releases :( 2. single big patch was split in 11 smaller ones 3. removed that noise -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739088] Review Request: arandr - Simple GTK+ XRandR GUI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739088 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #15 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk --- Looks marvelous now, Maros! May God bless you and your family. APPROVED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739088] Review Request: arandr - Simple GTK+ XRandR GUI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739088 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: FreeSOLID - A 3D collision detection C++ library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787713 --- Comment #52 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com --- Note that when adding patch in comment #50, the changes introduces in comment #40 should be reverted (since make install now install all required headers) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838901] Review Request: autotest - Framework for fully automated testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838901 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #2 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- This package's name conflicts with a tool of the same name, which is part of autoconf for ca. a decade. I'd therefore rather not see the package pass a review without a renamer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823234] Review Request: sugar-nutrition - A collection of nutrition games for sugar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823234 --- Comment #4 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com --- Thanks Dan -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823234] Review Request: sugar-nutrition - A collection of nutrition games for sugar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823234 Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: sugar-nutrition Short Description: A collection of nutrition games Owners: callkalpa Branches: f15 f16 f17 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 833333] Review request: cxf - Apache CXF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=83
Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com ---
All issues fixed, builds fine:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4230778
At the import time please change the Source0 link to:
http://archive.apache.org/dist/%{name}/%{version}/%{tarname}.tar.gz. This will
work also when a new release will be released.
Thanks!
*** APPROVED ***
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 833333] Review request: cxf - Apache CXF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=83 Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Patryk Obara pob...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: cxf Short Description: Apache CXF Owners: dreamertan Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823236] Review Request: sugar-recall - A series of memory games
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823236 --- Comment #4 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com --- Dan, here are the new files after fixing the issues, Spec URL: http://callkalpa.fedorapeople.org/sugar-recall/sugar-recall.spec SRPM URL: http://callkalpa.fedorapeople.org/sugar-recall/sugar-recall-2-2.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739088] Review Request: arandr - Simple GTK+ XRandR GUI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739088 Maros Zatko mza...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Maros Zatko mza...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: arandr Short Description: Simple GTK+ XRandR GUI Owners: mzatko Branches: f17 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 825496] Review Request: python-django-staticfiles - A Django app that provides helpers for serving static files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825496 Domingo Becker domingobec...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Domingo Becker domingobec...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-django-staticfiles Short Description: A Django app that provides helpers for serving static files Owners: beckerde Branches: InitialCC: diegobz -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #86 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com --- (In reply to comment #85) I've been in contact with Wolfgang. It's not formally packaged. I suggested this as it saves duplication of work. I guess you didn't find my comments helpful. Your last comments were about mate, at the moment I haven't got any free time to get involved in any other projects at this time. Ok. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #87 from Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com --- Again, My intention was not talk about Mate here. My intention was to help you with Cinnamon. I looked at your spec file and tried to build. Considering it's taken you 7 months and it's still not built and you are being quite hostile I will go ahead and refraining commenting any further in this bug. Feel free to email me offline. Thanks, Dan -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823835] Review Request: serp - Bytecode manipulation framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823835
--- Comment #2 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
SPECS/serp.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: serp-1.14.2-src-cvs.tar.gz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
serp.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Bytecode - Byte code, Byte-code,
Decorate
serp.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bytecode - byte code,
byte-code, decorate
serp.src: W: invalid-url Source0: serp-1.14.2-src-cvs.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
serp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Bytecode - Byte code, Byte-code,
Decorate
serp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bytecode - byte code,
byte-code, decorate
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: BSD
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: de045ead8836da02c45469bc2bf6ccf3
MD5SUM upstream package: 61839a866d7d8b73d82635cb08050607
CVS export, related to issue #1.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[-] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
Related to issue #1.
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[?] Latest version is packaged.
See issue #1.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4230877
=== Issues ===
1. I see that latest tagged release is 1.14.1. Wouldn't it make sense to use it
instead of exporting HEAD? Use 'serp-1_14_1' revision. If you decide to still
use HEAD, then please follow the guidelines for naming:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#SnapshotPackages
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 826645] Review Request: velocity-tools - Collection of useful tools for Velocity template engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=826645 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mgold...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 820548] Review Request: jasperreports - Report-generating tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820548 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mgold...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #88 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com --- (In reply to comment #87) Again, My intention was not talk about Mate here. My intention was to help you with Cinnamon. I looked at your spec file and tried to build. Considering it's taken you 7 months and it's still not built and you are being quite hostile I will go ahead and refraining commenting any further in this bug. Feel free to email me offline. Thanks, Dan My hostile comments were aimed at Ralf Corsepius, not you. The time taken so far to review cinnamon is beyond my control. As for help with cinnamon, I have already said I'm open to offers of help after the review process. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252#c33 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252#c34 I'm sorry that you have mistaken my abrasive manner as hostility to you. Leigh (irc leigh123linux) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #89 from Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com --- Apology accepted. I will look for you on IRC. Thanks, Dan -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 724864] Review Request: python-flask-openid - OpenID support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=724864 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package python-flask-openid-1.0.1-3.fc17: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing python-flask-openid-1.0.1-3.fc17' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-10414/python-flask-openid-1.0.1-3.fc17 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 836521] Review Request: python-setuptools_git - Setuptools revision control system plugin for Git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=836521 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-setuptools_git-0.4.2-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
