[Bug 835804] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-ReadmeMarkdownFromPod - Create README.mkdn from POD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835804 Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review+ | Flags||fedora-review? Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Module-Install-ReadmeMarkdownFromPod Short Description: Create README.mkdn from POD Owners: jplesnik mmaslano ppisar psabata Branches: 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 786071] Review Request: ghc-feldspar-language - Functional Embedded Language for DSP and PARallelism
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786071 --- Comment #11 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com --- A new 0.5.0.1 release is available, but, it has few dependencies that need to be packaged for Fedora. Will work on getting the dependencies available first, and will resubmit the latest package for 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 835804] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-ReadmeMarkdownFromPod - Create README.mkdn from POD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835804 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | 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 853784] Review Request: tiled - Tiled Map Editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853784
Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de ---
Here's the formal review of tiled. The package looks good now and is ready for
check-in. Please keep in mind to adapt the License field and to update the
license files in %doc once you update the package to a new upstream version
that doesn't contain any GPLv2+ code any longer.
$ rpmlint tiled*
tiled.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Tiled
tiled.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US platformer - platformed,
plat former, plat-former
tiled.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tmxviewer - interviewer
tiled.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Tiled
tiled.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US platformer - platformed,
plat former, plat-former
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
The above warnings are expected and can be ignored.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
- BSD according to boilerplates
- some headers still mention GPLv2+ by mistake (already fixed in upstream
repo)
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ sha256sum tiled-qt-0.8.1.tar.gz*
e5be7c38ceb24fbe0043648e8bc639804f3df5a60beb313eb039b2bcd56ad76c
tiled-qt-0.8.1.tar.gz
e5be7c38ceb24fbe0043648e8bc639804f3df5a60beb313eb039b2bcd56ad76c
tiled-qt-0.8.1.tar.gz.upstream
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[+] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file.
[+] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[.] 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.
[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: Patch files should be prefixed with %{name}-
[+] SHOULD: All patches should be commented in the spec file
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin
[Bug 857309] Review Request: hash-slinger - Generate various DNS records such as RFC-4255 SSHFP and RFC-698 TLSA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857309 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lemen...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com --- I'll review 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 851859] Review Request: mana - Opensource 2D MMORPG platform client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851859 Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de --- The package looks good now. Therefore, it's - 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 856161] Review Request: python-openstack-nose-plugin - openstack run_tests.py style output for nosetests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856161 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856161] Review Request: python-openstack-nose-plugin - openstack run_tests.py style output for nosetests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856161 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-openstack-nose-plugin-0.11-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-openstack-nose-plugin-0.11-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853692] Review Request: mate-settings-daemon - MATE Desktop settings daemon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853692
leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||leigh123li...@googlemail.co
||m
--- Comment #1 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com ---
All these files belong in the main package and not in -devel
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/liba11y-keyboard.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libclipboard.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libfont.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libhousekeeping.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libkeybindings.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libkeyboard.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libmedia-keys.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libmouse.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libsmartcard.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libsound.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libtyping-break.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libxrandr.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libxrdb.so
%{_libdir}/mate-settings-daemon-1.4.0/libxsettings.so
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853692] Review Request: mate-settings-daemon - MATE Desktop settings daemon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853692 --- Comment #2 from Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com --- thanks leigh, but those are shared libaries. how to proceed? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855657] Review Request: perl-syntax - Activate syntax extensions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855657 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ppi...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@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 853692] Review Request: mate-settings-daemon - MATE Desktop settings daemon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853692 --- Comment #3 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com --- (In reply to comment #2) thanks leigh, but those are shared libaries. how to proceed? Move them to the main package # rpm -ql gnome-settings-daemon |grep /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0 /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/a11y-keyboard.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/a11y-settings.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/background.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/clipboard.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/color.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/cursor.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/housekeeping.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/keyboard.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/liba11y-keyboard.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/liba11y-settings.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libbackground.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libclipboard.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libcolor.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libcursor.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libgsd.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libgsdwacom.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libhousekeeping.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libkeyboard.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libmedia-keys.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libmouse.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/liborientation.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libpower.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libprint-notifications.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libsmartcard.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libsound.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libupdates.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libxrandr.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/libxsettings.so /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/media-keys.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/mouse.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/orientation.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/power.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/print-notifications.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/smartcard.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/sound.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/updates.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/wacom.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/xrandr.gnome-settings-plugin /usr/lib64/gnome-settings-daemon-3.0/xsettings.gnome-settings-plugin You also need to add mate-conf scriptlets -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 837816] Review Request: ergo - A program for large-scale self-consistent field calculations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=837816 Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|martin.giesek...@uos.de Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de --- I take the review. Currently, the package doesn't build because of a failed test: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4482907 Maybe upstream should have a look at this. If the failure is false positive, you might want to disable the checks temporarily. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855657] Review Request: perl-syntax - Activate syntax extensions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855657 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2012-09-14 04:27:47 --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- This has been already packaged. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 823523 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823523] Review Request: perl-syntax - Activate syntax extensions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823523 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||iarn...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- *** Bug 855657 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 855665] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Type - Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855665 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ppi...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@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 856513] Review Request: python-termcolor - ANSII Color formatting for output in terminal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856513 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856513] Review Request: python-termcolor - ANSII Color formatting for output in terminal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856513 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-termcolor-1.1.0-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-termcolor-1.1.0-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856153] Review Request: python-django-openstack-auth - Django authentication backend for OpenStack Keystone
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856153 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856153] Review Request: python-django-openstack-auth - Django authentication backend for OpenStack Keystone
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856153 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-django-openstack-auth-1.0.2-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-django-openstack-auth-1.0.2-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 817193] Review Request: libccd - Library for collision detection between convex shapes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193 Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de --- Comment #8 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de --- Rich, are you still interested in this package? Your SRPM is unavailable at the moment. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857309] Review Request: hash-slinger - Generate various DNS records such as RFC-4255 SSHFP and RFC-698 TLSA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857309
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com ---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is silent (except bogus complains regarding spelling):
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint
../RPMS/noarch/hash-slinger-2.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm
../SRPMS/hash-slinger-2.0-1.fc19.src.rpm
hash-slinger.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US keyscan - key
scan, key-scan, keys can
hash-slinger.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sshfp - ssh
hash-slinger.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US keyscan - key scan,
key-scan, keys can
hash-slinger.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tlsa - Elsa, LSAT
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (GPLv2+
as stated in the sources).
- The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is NOT
included in %doc. Well some licensing info does included but it contains the
text og LGPLv2+ license while sources are licensed under GPLv2. Since you're
the upstream developer then please fix this.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum hash-slinger-2.0.tar.gz*
e1d803ad7ec1c9a449defddaf4936c682451047137607c572a9ca7ecdc1c55bd
hash-slinger-2.0.tar.gz
e1d803ad7ec1c9a449defddaf4936c682451047137607c572a9ca7ecdc1c55bd
hash-slinger-2.0.tar.gz.1
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
+ The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1).
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
* Please fix licensing issue (either drop COPYING from the final rpm or include
proper license text instead)
* (NOT A BLOCKER) you may drop %defattr directive - it's no longer needed ( =
RHEL5 or FC6).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 837816] Review Request: ergo - A program for large-scale self-consistent field calculations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=837816 --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Thanks. Upstreamed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 837816] Review Request: ergo - A program for large-scale self-consistent field calculations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=837816 --- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- For now you can check the package just on x86_64. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856189] Review Request: python-colorama - Cross-platform colored terminal text
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856189 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856189] Review Request: python-colorama - Cross-platform colored terminal text
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856189 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-colorama-0.2.4-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-colorama-0.2.4-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853784] Review Request: tiled - Tiled Map Editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853784 --- Comment #6 from Erik Schilling ablu.erikschill...@googlemail.com --- Note that tiled itself is still GPL. Only libtiled got relicensed Thanks a lot for 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 853784] Review Request: tiled - Tiled Map Editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853784 --- Comment #7 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de --- (In reply to comment #6) Note that tiled itself is still GPL. Only libtiled got relicensed Ah OK. Thanks for the clarification. Thanks a lot for review. You're welcome -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855665] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Type - Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855665 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- Source tar ball is original (verified from http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/A/AU/AUBERTG/Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0.tar.gz, SHA-256: 07427ea61b26a55a1afde85c5b3215ce714702903bd6ac0fe58d45f9904d215f). Ok. Source0 and URL are usable. Ok. Summary verified from lib/Data/Validate/Type.pm. Description is Ok. License verified from LICENSE, lib/Data/Validate/Type.pm, and t/LocalTest.pm. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. TODO: You can remove pruning empty directories from %install section. TODO: Do not package ignore.txt as documentation. TODO: Do not package META.json as documentation. TODO: Build-require `perl(Exporter)' (lib/Data/Validate/Type.pm:6). TODO: Build-require `perl(base)' (lib/Data/Validate/Type.pm:6). TODO: Build-require `perl(lib)' (t/20-hashref.t:8). All tests pass. Ok. $ rpmlint perl-Data-Validate-Type.spec ../SRPMS/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-1.fc19.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm perl-Data-Validate-Type.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Util - Til, U til, Until perl-Data-Validate-Type.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Util - Til, U til, Until perl-Data-Validate-Type.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Util - Til, U til, Until perl-Data-Validate-Type.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Util - Til, U til, Until 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. rpmlint is Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Sep 14 10:55 /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0 -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 806 Sep 9 04:59 /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0/Changes -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1662 Sep 9 04:59 /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0/META.json -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1439 Sep 9 04:59 /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0/README -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 128 Sep 9 04:59 /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0/ignore.txt -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 4698 Sep 14 10:55 /usr/share/man/man3/Data::Validate::Type.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Sep 14 10:55 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Data drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Sep 14 10:55 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Data/Validate -rw-r--r--1 rootroot19674 Sep 14 10:55 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Data/Validate/Type.pm File permissions and layout are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(base) 1 perl(Carp) 1 perl(Data::Dump) 1 perl(Exporter) 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.1) 1 perl(Params::Util) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Data::Validate::Type) = 1.3.0 1 perl-Data-Validate-Type = 1.3.0-1.fc19 Binary provides are Ok. $ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. Package builds in F19 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4483009). Ok. Package is in line with Fedora and Perl packaging guidelines. Please consider fixing `TODO' items before building this package. Resolution: Package 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 856516] Review Request: perl-podlators - Format POD source into various output formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856516 --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- perl-podlators files have been sub-packaged in perl-5.16.1-234.fc19. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798200] Review Request: dbus-tools - DBus developer tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798200 Michal Minar mimi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Michal Minar mimi...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: dbus-tools New Branches: f18 Owners: miminar 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 855665] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Type - Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855665 Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr --- (In reply to comment #1) TODO: You can remove pruning empty directories from %install section. TODO: Do not package ignore.txt as documentation. TODO: Do not package META.json as documentation. TODO: Build-require `perl(Exporter)' (lib/Data/Validate/Type.pm:6). TODO: Build-require `perl(base)' (lib/Data/Validate/Type.pm:6). TODO: Build-require `perl(lib)' (t/20-hashref.t:8). I've implemented all of this. Thank you for your review and spotting all of these. Spec URL: http://people.parinux.org/~seyman/fedora/perl-Data-Validate-Type/perl-Data-Validate-Type.spec SRPM URL: http://people.parinux.org/~seyman/fedora/perl-Data-Validate-Type/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-2.fc17.src.rpm New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Data-Validate-Type Short Description: Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions Owners: eseyman Branches: f17 f18 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 845934] Review Request: wt - C++ library for developing web applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845934 --- Comment #41 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- wt-3.2.2-6.p1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wt-3.2.2-6.p1.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 798200] Review Request: dbus-tools - DBus developer tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798200 Michal Minar mimi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 837816] Review Request: ergo - A program for large-scale self-consistent field calculations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=837816
--- Comment #5 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de ---
(In reply to comment #4)
For now you can check the package just on x86_64.
OK, the package builds fine on x86_64.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4483031
Besides addressing the i686 issue, you should add file COPYING to the doc
subpackage too. At least, I don't think that doc packages are an exception from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing.
Everything else looks good.
$ rpmlint ergo-*.rpm
ergo.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functionals - functional,
functional s, functionary
ergo.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multipole - multiple
ergo.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US parallelized - paralleled,
palatalized, pluralized
ergo.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US polarizabilities -
polarities
ergo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functionals - functional,
functional s, functionary
ergo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multipole - multiple
ergo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US parallelized -
paralleled, palatalized, pluralized
ergo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US polarizabilities -
polarities
ergo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bin2m
ergo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ergo
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.
All warnings are expected and can be ignored.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[X] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
- add file COPYING to the doc subpackage too
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ sha256sum ergo-3.2.tar.gz*
e50b7f1e6bb51a38ad7056fa3ffba48a045c43dea1d6c7f6fde6c706e8435af4
ergo-3.2.tar.gz
e50b7f1e6bb51a38ad7056fa3ffba48a045c43dea1d6c7f6fde6c706e8435af4
ergo-3.2.tar.gz.upstream
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[X] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, ...
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) ...
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[+] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, ...
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
EPEL = 5 only:
[+] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field.
[+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
[.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
[.] 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.
[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[.]
[Bug 847811] Review Request: libee - An event expression library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847811
Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mschwe...@gmail.com
Depends On||847817
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Summary: An event expression library inspired by CEE
Not covered by any guidelines, but in many cases the leading article is
superfluous and doesn't increase conciseness.
Summary: Event expression library inspired by CEE
That makes a much better reading when displayed by Anaconda and package tools.
License: LGPLv2+
True. The majority of source files contain an LGPLv2+ preamble. Only
src/cjson/* contains merged files with an MIT-style preamble. There's a minor
typo at the top of file COPYING, which refers to GPL rather than LGPL.
Group: Development/Libraries
Base library packages still enter group System Environment/Libraries.
%description
I would rearrange the two paragraphs to begin with the explanation of what
libee does, then continue with the explanation of what CEE is.
%package devel
Summary: Include files for libee
More generally, it's
Summary: Development files for libee
because not just the header files are included.
Requires: %name = %version-%release
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
%package utils
Summary: The libee-convert utility provided by event expression library
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Same here.
The summary restricts the package contents to just the libee-convert utility.
It could be made more general to sum up whether these tools are optional or
strictly needed.
%{__make}
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Parallel_make
Plus: if you don't have a compelling reason to use a macro here, feel free to
run make from $PATH just as done with many other commands one runs in .spec
files.
%install
rm -rf %{buildroot}
It will be automatically cleaned:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847817] Review Request: libestr - A library to handle strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847817 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||847811 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 848388] Review Request: liblognorm - Tool to normalize log data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848388 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||847811, 847817 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847817] Review Request: libestr - A library to handle strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847817 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||848388 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847811] Review Request: libee - An event expression library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847811 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||848388 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856217] Review Request: quearcode - A tool for creating QR Codes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856217 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- quearcode-0.2.1-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/quearcode-0.2.1-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856217] Review Request: quearcode - A tool for creating QR Codes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856217 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- quearcode-0.2.1-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/quearcode-0.2.1-1.fc16 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856217] Review Request: quearcode - A tool for creating QR Codes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856217 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- quearcode-0.2.1-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/quearcode-0.2.1-1.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 856217] Review Request: quearcode - A tool for creating QR Codes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856217 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- quearcode-0.2.1-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/quearcode-0.2.1-1.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 --- Comment #5 from Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #3) In %check, I'm assuming ping -c 1 dns.google.com is to check whether the build host is connected to a public network and will then run all tests? Yes. But it also check that resolver works. So, as still prefer a name rather that an ip (and a server allowing ping) But your ping test would check that the build machine's DNS is set up and resolving correctly. As far as I understand the package, it could work regardless of whether the build machine's DNS is set up correctly or not by correctly providing DNS nameserver IP addresses (and the package resolver test uses the Google Public DNS IPs). If you really prefer a DNS name, perhaps use google.com instead? I believe this would resolve for more people than dns.google.com -- this would match the actual package resolver test as well. dns.google.com does not resolve on my machine and may not for other building machines. Perhaps instead use one of the Google Public DNS IP addresses used in the resolver test file since they respond to pings as well? -- 8.8.8.8 or 8.8.4.4 In our case, koji won't run this test. This is the designed behavior. Do you think this is a blocker for the review ? No, not a blocker ;) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 --- Comment #6 from Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 612806 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=612806action=edit Generated by fedora-review 0.2.2 (9f8c0e5) last change: 2012-08-09 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com --- No blockers. 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 857410] New: Review Request: howl-logger - High-speed ObjectWeb Logger
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857410 Bug ID: 857410 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: howl-logger - High-speed ObjectWeb Logger Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: punto...@libero.it Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/howl-logger.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/howl-logger-1.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: HOWL is a logger implementation providing features required by the ObjectWeb JOTM project, with a public API that is generally usable by any Transaction Manager. HOWL uses unformatted binary logs to maximize performance and specifies a journalization API with methods necessary to support JOTM recovery operations. Fedora Account System Username: gil ActiveMQ ActiveIO :: Core build/requires -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856111] Review Request: python-django-compressor - Compresses linked and inline JavaScript or CSS into single cached files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856111 --- Comment #1 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- Updated SPEC, SRPM (added requirement) SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-compressor.spec SRPM: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-compressor-1.2-2.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 857410] Review Request: howl-logger - High-speed ObjectWeb Logger
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857410 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 835804] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-ReadmeMarkdownFromPod - Create README.mkdn from POD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835804 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853463] Review Request: php-redis - Extension for communicating with the Redis key-value store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853463 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855665] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Type - Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855665 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 753597] Review Request: yazpp - C++ API for YAZ
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=753597 --- Comment #6 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de --- Ryan, what's the status of this package? Are you still interested in it? If not, please close the ticket as NOTABUG. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- Thanks for the review. I will change used DNS after import. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: php-pear-Net-DNS2 Short Description: PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server Owners: remi Branches: f17 f18 el6 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 835804] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-ReadmeMarkdownFromPod - Create README.mkdn from POD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835804 Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Module-Install-ReadmeM ||arkdownFromPod-0.03-1.fc19 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-09-14 07:39:03 --- Comment #6 from Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com --- Thank you for the review and the 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
[Bug 822920] Review Request: activeio - Apache ActiveMQ ActiveIO :: Core
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822920 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- activeio-3.1.4-3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/activeio-3.1.4-3.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857440] New: Review Request: kio-upnp-ms - UPnP mediaserver kio slave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857440 Bug ID: 857440 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: kio-upnp-ms - UPnP mediaserver kio slave Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: rdie...@math.unl.edu Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kio-upnp-ms/kio-upnp-ms.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kio-upnp-ms/kio-upnp-ms-1.0.0-1.2002git.fc17.src.rpm Description: This is the UPnP MediaServer KIO-slave for the KDE platform. It supports both browse and search based MediaServers and is able to perform various tasks on them, including running queries, listing directories and files and allowing KDE based applications transparent access to them. Being used for Amarok UPnP support, the slave features many developer friendly features which allow faster speed or easier handling while compromising on user-friendliness when used “under the hood”. Fedora Account System Username: rdieter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857440] Review Request: kio-upnp-ms - UPnP mediaserver kio slave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857440 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||656997 (kde-reviews) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855665] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Type - Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855665 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855665] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Type - Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855665 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-2.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855665] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Type - Public interface to Params::Util offering data type validation functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855665 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Data-Validate-Type-1.3.0-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856516] Review Request: perl-podlators - Format POD source into various output formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856516 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|826872 | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853463] Review Request: php-redis - Extension for communicating with the Redis key-value store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853463 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853463] Review Request: php-redis - Extension for communicating with the Redis key-value store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853463 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-redis-2.2.2-5.git6f7087f.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-redis-2.2.2-5.git6f7087f.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853463] Review Request: php-redis - Extension for communicating with the Redis key-value store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853463 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-redis-2.2.2-5.git6f7087f.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-redis-2.2.2-5.git6f7087f.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 853463] Review Request: php-redis - Extension for communicating with the Redis key-value store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853463 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-redis-2.2.2-5.git6f7087f.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-redis-2.2.2-5.git6f7087f.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 852326] Review Request: powerpc-utils-python - python utilities for PowerPC systems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=852326 --- Comment #8 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com --- Re-ping: questions are: 1) ppc64-utils is a meta-package that brings in a lot of these similar tools. Should ppc64-utils just require powerpc-utils-python? 2) This is a GUI tool. Having a GUI tool in all installs strikes me as somewhat odd - is that what you want? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857461] New: Review Request: perl-CDDB_get - Read the CDDB entry for an audio CD in your drive
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857461 Bug ID: 857461 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: perl-CDDB_get - Read the CDDB entry for an audio CD in your drive Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-CDDB_get/perl-CDDB_get.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-CDDB_get/perl-CDDB_get-2.28-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: This module/script gets the CDDB data for an audio CD. You need a CD-ROM drive and an active Internet connection in order to do that. Fedora Account System Username: ppisar -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-pear-Net-DNS2-1.2.3-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-pear-Net-DNS2-1.2.3-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-pear-Net-DNS2-1.2.3-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-pear-Net-DNS2-1.2.3-1.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 847517] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS2 - PHP Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847517 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-pear-Net-DNS2-1.2.3-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-pear-Net-DNS2-1.2.3-1.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 857484] New: Review Request: python-simplevisor - Python simple daemons supervisor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857484 Bug ID: 857484 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: python-simplevisor - Python simple daemons supervisor Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: massimo.pala...@gmail.com Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: https://mpaladin.web.cern.ch/mpaladin/rpms/python-simplevisor/python-simplevisor.spec SRPM URL: https://mpaladin.web.cern.ch/mpaladin/rpms/python-simplevisor/python-simplevisor-0.5-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: Simplevisor is a simple daemons supervisor, it is inspired by Erlang OTP and it can supervise hierarchies of services. Fedora Account System Username: mpaladin -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856238] Review Request: scratch - Programming language learning environment for stories, games, music and art
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856238 --- Comment #5 from Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org --- Updated package for upstream release 1.4.0.7. This has mp3 totally removed. (No binary plugins in the source tarball, and all the standard mp3s are now wav files so it's largely a non-issue.) Spec URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/scratch.spec SRPM URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/scratch-1.4.0.7-1.fc17.mattdm.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 857487] New: Review Request: ht-alegreya-fonts - A Serif typeface originally intended for literature
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857487 Bug ID: 857487 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: ht-alegreya-fonts - A Serif typeface originally intended for literature Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: tcall...@redhat.com Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/ht-alegreya-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/ht-alegreya-fonts-1.004-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Alegreya was chosen as one of 53 Fonts of the Decade at the ATypI Letter2 competition in September 2011, and one of the top 14 text type systems. It was also selected in the 2nd Bienal Iberoamericana de Diseño, competition held in Madrid in 2010. Alegreya is a typeface originally intended for literature. Among its crowning characteristics, it conveys a dynamic and varied rhythm which facilitates the reading of long texts. Also, it provides freshness to the page while referring to the calligraphic letter, not as a literal interpretation, but rather in a contemporary typographic language. The italic has just as much care and attention to detail in the design as the roman. The bold weights are strong, and the Black weights are really experimental for the genre. Not only does Alegreya provide great performance, but also achieves a strong and harmonious text by means of elements designed in an atmosphere of diversity. Fedora Account System Username: spot -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 851859] Review Request: mana - Opensource 2D MMORPG platform client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851859 --- Comment #13 from Erik Schilling ablu.erikschill...@googlemail.com --- Thanks a lot for all! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: mana Short Description: Opensource 2D MMORPG platform client Owners: ablu Branches: f16 f17 f18 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 853784] Review Request: tiled - Tiled Map Editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853784 --- Comment #8 from Erik Schilling ablu.erikschill...@googlemail.com --- Thanks a lot for all! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: tiled Short Description: Tiled Map Editor Owners: ablu Branches: f16 f17 f18 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 857440] Review Request: kio-upnp-ms - UPnP mediaserver kio slave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857440 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org Alias||kio-upnp-ms -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856719] Review Request: python-cinderclient - Python API and CLI for OpenStack cinder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856719 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856719] Review Request: python-cinderclient - Python API and CLI for OpenStack cinder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856719 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-cinderclient-0.2-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-cinderclient-0.2-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 851859] Review Request: mana - Opensource 2D MMORPG platform client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851859 --- Comment #14 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de --- Erik, don't forget to set the fedora-cvs flag (in the Flags section above) to ?. Otherwise, your request doesn't get noticed. If you can't access the flags yet, just wait a couple of hours until your packager permissions have been propagated to all servers. Then try again. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856722] Review Request: openstack-cinder - OpenStack Volume service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856722 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856722] Review Request: openstack-cinder - OpenStack Volume service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856722 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- openstack-cinder-2012.2-0.2.f3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openstack-cinder-2012.2-0.2.f3.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853784] Review Request: tiled - Tiled Map Editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853784 Erik Schilling ablu.erikschill...@googlemail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853784] Review Request: tiled - Tiled Map Editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853784 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 839071] Review Request: python-flask-babel - Adds i18n/l10n support to Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839071
Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #10 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com ---
Since this package respects Fedora general and python specific guidelines (see
formal review below), i hereby approve this package in Fedora Packages
Collection.
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: EXTRA Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
[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 Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[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 contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package
[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 Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[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 systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: SHOULD Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: 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 tarball generation or download is documented.
[-]:
[Bug 830328] Review Request: gnome-initial-setup - configure your desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830328 --- Comment #11 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com --- New spec file / srpm (with Requires:gdm) here: http://mclasen.fedorapeople.org/gnome-initial-setup.spec http://mclasen.fedorapeople.org/gnome-initial-setup-0.2-2.fc18.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 852326] Review Request: powerpc-utils-python - python utilities for PowerPC systems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=852326 --- Comment #9 from baude ba...@us.ibm.com --- Bill, I am inclined to agree with your #2 in comment 8. Ill discuss #1 at the next weekly fedora powerpc call. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 839071] Review Request: python-flask-babel - Adds i18n/l10n support to Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839071 pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-flask-babel Short Description: Adds i18n/l10n support to Flask applications Owners: pcpa 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 839071] Review Request: python-flask-babel - Adds i18n/l10n support to Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839071 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856858] Review Request: Jokte - Latam CMS, Joomla Fork
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856858 Juan Botero juanpabloboterolo...@gmail.com 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 857193] Review Request: activemq - Open source messaging and Integration Patterns server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857193 Matt Spaulding mspauldin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 839071] Review Request: python-flask-babel - Adds i18n/l10n support to Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839071 pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-09-14 19:45:18 --- Comment #13 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- python-flask-babel has been built in rawhide. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798071] Review Request: fedora-arm-installer - Writes binary image files to any specified block device
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798071
--- Comment #7 from Jon Chiappetta jonc_mail...@yahoo.ca ---
Just in case anyone is still interested in this project, the latest packages
and code (SRPM={source,spec}) URLs can be found below (maintained by me). The
only complaint so far is that this program mainly works on English based
systems due to the fact that I am parsing through subprocess output (with
regex) on both Linux and Windows so it is not multi-language as of yet but
could be one day.
SRPM Binary ( http://fossjon.fedorapeople.org/packages/fedora-arm-installer/
)
Source Code (
https://github.com/fossjon/Seneca/tree/master/source/projects/fedora-arm-installer
)
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
