[Bug 874689] Review Request: libuv - Platform layer for node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874689 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags|needinfo?(mru...@redhat.com | |) | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Matthias Runge --- Great news, last time I checked for the exception was two days ago. All issues fixed, 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 876865] Review Request: Brewtarget - beer recipe tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876865 Pete Travis changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||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 876865] New: Review Request: Brewtarget - beer recipe tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876865 Bug ID: 876865 Summary: Review Request: Brewtarget - beer recipe tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: m...@petetravis.com Type: --- Spec URL: http://randomuser.org/brewtarget/brewtarget.spec SRPM URL: http://randomuser.org/brewtarget/brewtarget-1.2.5-rc1.fc17.src.rpm Description: Brewtarget is an open source beer recipe creation tool. It automatically calculates color, bitterness, and other parameters for you while you drag and drop ingredients into the recipe. Brewtarget also has many other tools such as priming sugar calculators, OG correction help, and a unique mash designing tool. It also can export and import recipes in BeerXML. Fedora Account System Username: immanetize I've identified the need for three patches. One is a minor syntax correction for brewtarget desktop, another to place documentation in the correct folder, and the third to enable the application to warn and continue if the docs don't exist, rather than exit. All patches have been communicated upstream with context, as noted in the spec. Koji scratch builds have completed successfully: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4690714 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4690662 I haven't encountered any notable usage issues during cursory testing of the application. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 872958] Review Request: opusfile - A high-level API for decoding and seeking within .opus files
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872958
Brendan Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brendan.jones...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|brendan.jones...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones ---
Hi Peter,
this package is APPROVED. Nice job.
If you have time could you have a quick look at bug 870184
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[x] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[ ]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in %package
devel
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bsjones/rpmbuild/SRPMS
/review-opusfile/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: CheckResultdir
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 5 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager
[Bug 876404] Review Request: php-channel-aws - Adds the Amazon Web Services channel to PEAR
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876404 Gregor Tätzner changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gre...@freenet.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 876404] Review Request: php-channel-aws - Adds the Amazon Web Services channel to PEAR
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876404 --- Comment #2 from Gregor Tätzner --- Created attachment 645398 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=645398&action=edit pre-review minor issues: php-channel-aws.src:60: W: macro-in-%changelog %clean php-channel-aws.src:41: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 4, tab: line 41) I think the version should start with 1.0 since this is the initial package for aws channel. Well, at least that looks less arbitrary than 1.3. Make also sure to adjust the version strings in the changelog (note that this is nothing you would ever do in an already imported 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 870184] Review Request: drumkv1 - an old-school digital drumkit sampler
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870184 --- Comment #3 from Brendan Jones --- SRPM: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/reviews/drumkv1.spec SRPM: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/reviews/drumkv1-0.1.0-3.fc18.src.rpm Removed unwanted source dirs -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840602] Review Request: maradns - Authoritative and recursive DNS server made with security in mind
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840602 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840602] Review Request: maradns - Authoritative and recursive DNS server made with security in mind
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840602 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- maradns-2.0.06-3.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing 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 825148] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-ibus - IBus gnome-shell-extension
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825148 fujiwara changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Flags|needinfo?(tfujiwar@redhat.c | |om) | Last Closed||2012-11-15 00:20:16 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 825148] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-ibus - IBus gnome-shell-extension
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825148 Bug 825148 depends on bug 825143, which changed state. Bug 825143 Summary: Review Request: ibus-xkb - IBus XKB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825143 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 825143] Review Request: ibus-xkb - IBus XKB
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825143 fujiwara changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Flags|needinfo?(tfujiwar@redhat.c | |om) | Last Closed||2012-11-15 00:20:03 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 825148] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-ibus - IBus gnome-shell-extension
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825148 Parag changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pnem...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(tfujiwar@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #4 from Parag --- fujiwara, Do we need this package to be reviewed? If not can you please close this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 825143] Review Request: ibus-xkb - IBus XKB
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825143 Parag changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pnem...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(tfujiwar@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #3 from Parag --- fujiwara, Do we need this package to be reviewed? If not can you please close this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 866325] Review Request: ugene - genome analysis suite
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866325 Yuliya Algaer changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #18 from Yuliya Algaer --- Package Change Request == Package Name: ugene New Branches: f19 Owners: yalgaer I can't run building package with error: "package ugene is blocked for tag f19". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869026] Review Request: mate-media - MATE media programs
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869026 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- mate-media-1.4.0-4.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
[Bug 869026] Review Request: mate-media - MATE media programs
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869026 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:45:52 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871037] Review Request: librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- librcc-0.2.9-3.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
[Bug 871037] Review Request: librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:44:18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 874720] Review Request: python-anykeystore - A key-value store supporting multiple backends
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874720 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:41:17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on 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
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848388 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- liblognorm-0.3.4-4.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
[Bug 848388] Review Request: liblognorm - Tool to normalize log data
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848388 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:38:31 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 829116] Review Request: ninja-build - A small build system with a focus on speed
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829116 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- ninja-build-1.0.0-1.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
[Bug 829116] Review Request: ninja-build - A small build system with a focus on speed
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829116 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- ninja-build-1.0.0-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 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
[Bug 829116] Review Request: ninja-build - A small build system with a focus on speed
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829116 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:31:01 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868940] Review Request: s3ql - Full-Featured File System for Online Data Storage
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868940 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:28:14 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868940] Review Request: s3ql - Full-Featured File System for Online Data Storage
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868940 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- s3ql-1.12-7.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
[Bug 859713] Review Request: php-cloudfiles - PHP API for the Cloud Files storage system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=859713 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- php-cloudfiles-1.7.11-2.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
[Bug 858841] Review Request: owncloud - Private file sync and share server
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858841 Bug 858841 depends on bug 859713, which changed state. Bug 859713 Summary: Review Request: php-cloudfiles - PHP API for the Cloud Files storage system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=859713 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 859713] Review Request: php-cloudfiles - PHP API for the Cloud Files storage system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=859713 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:27:37 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857705] Review Request: dataquay - Simple RDF for C++ and Qt applications
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857705 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- dataquay-0.9-3.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
[Bug 857705] Review Request: dataquay - Simple RDF for C++ and Qt applications
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857705 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:27:12 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 872771] Review Request: qextserialport - Qt interface class for old fashioned serial ports
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872771 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- qextserialport-1.2-0.2.beta2.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
[Bug 872771] Review Request: qextserialport - Qt interface class for old fashioned serial ports
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872771 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 21:26:56 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 865303] Review Request: realTimeConfigQuickScan - inspect system settings for realtime performance
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865303 Brendan Jones changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #25 from Brendan Jones --- Thanks for the review. I will contact upstream New Package SCM Request === Package Name: realTimeConfigQuickScan Short Description: realtime settings inspector Owners: bsjones 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 875150] Review Request: MariaDB - An enhanced drop-in replacement for MySQL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875150 --- Comment #10 from Renich Bon Ciric --- (In reply to comment #9) > I think we can still keep going to work on this review to have it prepared > for the future. I apologize for my English; it seems I keep saying things the wrong way. I will, gladly, keep packaging MariaDB actively. > Ah, I see the problem now. The same issue has mysql as well and it is solved > there by removing all libmysqlclient_r.so.18.* links and keeping just > libmysqlclient_r.so for backward compatibility. However, since > $ repoquery --whatrequires '*libmysqlclient_r.so*' > returns no results, what about to remove all libmysqlclient_r.so* links for > now and see if anybody needs it at all? Ok, so I will remove the libmysqlclient_r.so* for now as you suggest. I'll have the SRPM revision 3 up in a while. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 828993] Review Request: l3afpad - Simple text editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828993 --- Comment #15 from Benedikt Schäfer --- Ok, now it should be finished! Hopefully ;) Spec URL: http://ib54003.fedorapeople.org/rpm/l3afpad/l3afpad.spec SRPM URL: http://ib54003.fedorapeople.org/rpm/l3afpad/l3afpad-0.8.18.1.10-2.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 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184 Jakub Hrozek changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jakub Hrozek --- Sorry, my fault, I was doing the review and was supposed to set the flag. Fixed now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 875274] Review Request: python-velruse - Simplify third-party authentication for web applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875274 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-velruse-1.0.3-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing 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 875274] Review Request: python-velruse - Simplify third-party authentication for web applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875274 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 865538] Review Request: datanommer-commands - Console commands for datanommer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865538 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-11-14 14:45:48 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 865536] Review Request: python-datanommer-consumer - Hub consumer plugin for datanommer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865536 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-11-14 14:45:42 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 874689] Review Request: libuv - Platform layer for node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874689 Stephen Gallagher changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(mru...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #3 from Stephen Gallagher --- Thanks for the review. As of today, https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/231 was approved for a bundling exception. I've also corrected the doubly-listed directory and uploaded a new version of the package with updated upstream sources: Spec: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/libuv/libuv.spec SRPM: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/libuv/libuv-0.9.3-0.2.git09b0222.fc18.src.rpm Built in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4688672 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870615] Review Request: snmptt - An SNMP trap handler written in Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870615 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- snmptt-1.4-0.6.beta2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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
[Bug 853124] Review Request: stompclt - Versatile STOMP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853124 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- stompclt-0.5-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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
[Bug 862160] Review Request: valkyrie - Graphical User Interface for Valgrind Suite
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862160 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 13:29:18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853124] Review Request: stompclt - Versatile STOMP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853124 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- stompclt-0.5-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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
[Bug 860283] Review Request: dmlite-plugins-profiler - Profiler plugin for dmlite
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860283 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- dmlite-plugins-profiler-0.4.0-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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
[Bug 870615] Review Request: snmptt - An SNMP trap handler written in Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870615 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- snmptt-1.4-0.6.beta2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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
[Bug 862160] Review Request: valkyrie - Graphical User Interface for Valgrind Suite
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862160 --- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System --- valkyrie-2.0.0-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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
[Bug 860283] Review Request: dmlite-plugins-profiler - Profiler plugin for dmlite
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860283 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 13:28:44 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870615] Review Request: snmptt - An SNMP trap handler written in Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870615 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-14 13:29:34 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 860283] Review Request: dmlite-plugins-profiler - Profiler plugin for dmlite
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860283 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- dmlite-plugins-profiler-0.4.0-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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
[Bug 863571] Review Request: flare - A single player, 2D-isometric, action Role-Playing Game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863571 --- Comment #30 from Volker Fröhlich --- I just noticed you did. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 863571] Review Request: flare - A single player, 2D-isometric, action Role-Playing Game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863571 --- Comment #29 from Volker Fröhlich --- If you didn't change anything else, just upload the spec file. Then we can finish this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840602] Review Request: maradns - Authoritative and recursive DNS server made with security in mind
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840602 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- maradns-2.0.06-3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/maradns-2.0.06-3.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 840602] Review Request: maradns - Authoritative and recursive DNS server made with security in mind
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840602 Fedora Update System 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 852174] Review Request: snapper - Tool for filesystem snapshot management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=852174 --- Comment #16 from Richard Hughes --- I'm quite keen on using snapper for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OfflineSystemUpdates so if I can persuade someone to finish this review with a couple of drinks that'd be great :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 874238] Review Request: DOM Tooltip (aka domTT) is a Javascript widget
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874238 --- Comment #11 from MartinKG --- Mathias, thanks for your review. Spec URL: http://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/domtt.spec SRPM URL: http://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/domtt-0.7.3-6.fc17.src.rpm %changelog * Wed Nov 14 2012 Martin Gansser - 0.7.3-6 - added BuildArch noarch $ rpmlint domtt-0.7.3-6.fc17.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint domtt-0.7.3-6.fc17.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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 876645] New: Review Request: python-fixtures - Fixtures, reusable state for writing clean tests and more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876645 Bug ID: 876645 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-fixtures - Fixtures, reusable state for writing clean tests and more Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: p...@draigbrady.com Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pbrady/python-fixtures/python-fixtures.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pbrady/python-fixtures/python-fixtures-0.3.9-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Fixtures defines a Python contract for reusable state / support logic, primarily for unit testing. Helper and adaption logic is included to make it easy to write your own fixtures using the fixtures contract. Glue code is provided that makes using fixtures that meet the Fixtures contract in unittest compatible test cases easy and straight forward. Fedora Account System Username: pbrady -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184 --- Comment #7 from Jan Cholasta --- Yes, I was sponsored a couple hours ago by rvo...@redhat.com. Shall I ask him to set the flag? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 875150] Review Request: MariaDB - An enhanced drop-in replacement for MySQL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875150 --- Comment #9 from Honza Horak --- (In reply to comment #8) > > If we'll ever replace mysql by maria, I'd suggest to do it together with new > > major/minor version rebase (probably to 5.6). Then soname versions would > > bump and all clients would have to be rebuilt anyway. > > Ok, so, I will leave it at that for now. Let's see what comes in the future > and what guidance I can get in the devel list. I will contact upstream as > well. I think we can still keep going to work on this review to have it prepared for the future. > That said, you will notice that libmysqlclient.so is a symlink as well that > points to libmysqlclient.so.18 so... should I still put it, and all that > points to it, into devel? Ah, I see the problem now. The same issue has mysql as well and it is solved there by removing all libmysqlclient_r.so.18.* links and keeping just libmysqlclient_r.so for backward compatibility. However, since $ repoquery --whatrequires '*libmysqlclient_r.so*' returns no results, what about to remove all libmysqlclient_r.so* links for now and see if anybody needs it at 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 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- The review flag isn't set, and Jan, are you sponsored? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184 Jan Cholasta changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jan Cholasta --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: peervpn Short Description: A VPN software using full mesh network topology Owners: jcholast Branches: 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 866495] Review Request: vzctl - OpenVZ containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866495 --- Comment #13 from Glauber Costa --- Hello, any further comments here ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 875735] Review Request: fedora-jam-kde-theme - Fedora Jam KDE theme
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875735 --- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones --- Thanks - rpmlint output is clean (except for dangling symlink warnings which are OK). SPEC: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/reviews/fedora-jam-kde-theme.spec SRPM: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/reviews/fedora-jam-kde-theme-1.0.1-1.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 876317] Review Request: ec2-metadata - EC2 instance metadata query tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876317 --- Comment #7 from Matthew Miller --- (In reply to comment #6) > Hi Mathew > You should contact upstream to include the license, > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text I've changed the license tag to MIT to reflect the actual license in the source file. Since this file contains its own license in text form, I don't think there's a particular need to include a separate copy. > In this case, you must document how to generate the tarball in the spec > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL Since there is a single small file, I don't think that gains anything. This source is smaller than most patches. If there were multiple sources, I would do that. > In this case should follow the guidelines for EPEL5 Added Buildroot tag to match. Updated: Spec URL: http://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/ec2-metadata.spec SRPM URL: http://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/ec2-metadata-2012.08.30-2.fc18.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 874238] Review Request: DOM Tooltip (aka domTT) is a Javascript widget
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874238
--- Comment #10 from Matthias Runge ---
sorry, that this took so long.
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
[!]: 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.
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#ValidLicenseShortNames
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[-]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[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.
[!]: 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]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: CheckResultdir
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 6 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: 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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of
[Bug 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184 --- Comment #4 from Jan Cholasta --- Thank you for the 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 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Hrozek --- Koji build succeeded: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4687307 The sha256 hash of sources from the tarball and upstream matches and is: aa655eb46cbb8a9556434636b9ebffcd7b168755c2349b4615165d8db54c3817 All other review items still pass. I would consider this package approved. A sponsor is still needed, though. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 875735] Review Request: fedora-jam-kde-theme - Fedora Jam KDE theme
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875735 --- Comment #1 from Jørn Lomax --- There is a version issue in the changelog. The version in the spec is 1.0.0, in the changelog it's 0.0.1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 875735] Review Request: fedora-jam-kde-theme - Fedora Jam KDE theme
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875735 Jørn Lomax changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||northlo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|northlo...@gmail.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 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184 --- Comment #2 from Jan Cholasta --- Updated to 0.029. Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/464637/peervpn.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/464637/peervpn-0.029-1.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 846481] Review Request: cantata - Client for the Music Player Daemon (MPD)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=846481 Ralf Corsepius changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #6 from Ralf Corsepius --- Another small nit: # rpm -q --requires -p /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/cantata-0.8.3.1-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm ... /usr/bin/env ... This requires originates from /usr/libexec/kde4/cantata-dynamic, which uses a shebang of "#!/usr/bin/env perl". This should be changed into "#!/usr/bin/perl" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
