[Bug 910441] Review Request: perl-POSIX-AtFork - Hook registrations at fork(2)
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910441 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-POSIX-AtFork Short Description: Hook registrations at fork(2) Owners: ppisar jplesnik psabata Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=NoqGZfit6r&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871511] Review Request: heimdall - Flash firmware on to Samsung Galaxy S devices
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871511 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WMWdlG3f2q&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871511] Review Request: heimdall - Flash firmware on to Samsung Galaxy S devices
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871511 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- heimdall-1.4-0.2.rc2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/heimdall-1.4-0.2.rc2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=OQoFcwEGpP&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 914996] Review Request: gitstats - Generates statistics based on GIT repository activity
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=914996
Pavel Raiskup changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #6 from Pavel Raiskup ---
Hi Stephenm, here is my first comment iteration :)
===
1. bad spec naming?
> Upstream have already updated to resolve this so I've updated the SPEC and
> SRPM to pick this up. I also realized that there is .pod file provided which
> can be used to generate the man page so that is now also included.
>
> Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats-0.2.spec
> SRPM URL:
> http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats-0.2-20130224git0843039.fc18.src.rpm
Why do you now call the spec file gitstats-0.2.spec and not gitstats.spec?
Your
first specfile was called gitstats.spec..
2. unnecessary %attr() macros
> $ cat *.spec
> [...]
> %files
> %attr(755, root, root) %{_bindir}/%{name}
^^ none of these should be needed
3. Missing release number
> Release:%{checkout}%{?dist}
I think that even the first release number should be specified. Partly because
I (as a reviewer) can see, where it will be finally placed and because of this
also:
$ rpmdev-vercmp gitstats-0.2-20130224git0843039
gitstats-0.2-1.20130224git0843039
gitstats-0.2-20130224git0843039 > gitstats-0.2-1.20130224git0843039
4. (nit: I would create one-newline separator between changelog entries)
5. Gzip inside BuildRequires is redundant .. it must be installed on minimum
build system.
Pavel
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=L8GL0SGVx7&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911030] Review Request: nodejs-eyes - A customizable value inspector for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911030 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=E9kp1YxfzI&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911030] Review Request: nodejs-eyes - A customizable value inspector for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911030 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-eyes-0.1.8-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-eyes-0.1.8-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3rm8fQ0bPA&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911181] Review Request: nodejs-growl - Growl unobtrusive notifications for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911181 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kemKCsE2iL&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911181] Review Request: nodejs-growl - Growl unobtrusive notifications for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911181 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-growl-1.7.0-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-growl-1.7.0-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gcw6x7rTys&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911187] Review Request: nodejs-ms - Tiny milliseconds conversion utility for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911187 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nVkA282xFj&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911187] Review Request: nodejs-ms - Tiny milliseconds conversion utility for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911187 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-ms-0.5.0-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-ms-0.5.0-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ixJ1VwNwtP&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911258] Review Request: expresso - A lightweight, fast, test-driven development (TDD) framework for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911258 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=trF9U77oQo&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911258] Review Request: expresso - A lightweight, fast, test-driven development (TDD) framework for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911258 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- expresso-0.9.2-3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/expresso-0.9.2-3.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=tcJA7EUDos&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 755065] Review Request: python-sqlalchemy0.7 - compat package
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755065 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||ape...@gmail.com Resolution|ERRATA |--- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |python-sqlalchemy0.7 - |python-sqlalchemy0.7 - |compat package epel 6 |compat package Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #12 from Alan Pevec --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-sqlalchemy0.7 New Branches: devel Owners: pbrady stevetraylen InitialCC: apevec We need to revive this compat package in F19 where python-sqlalchemy was updated to 0.8.0 beta http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=363832 which isn't compatible with OpenStack: https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/master/tools/pip-requires SQLAlchemy>=0.7.3,<0.8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8u9fQBG1Z4&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 755065] Review Request: python-sqlalchemy0.7 - compat package
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755065 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Alan Pevec --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-sqlalchemy0.7 New Branches: devel Owners: pbrady stevetraylen InitialCC: apevec We need to revive this compat package in F19 where python-sqlalchemy was updated to 0.8.0 beta http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=363832 which isn't compatible with OpenStack: https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/master/tools/pip-requires SQLAlchemy>=0.7.3,<0.8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=836yahR7DS&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 903246] Review Request: cpopen - Creates a subprocess in simpler safer manner
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903246 --- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt --- You could *really* run "rpmlint -i" on all the rpms as recommended and comment on the output. ;o) The rather generic name of the shared lib is potentially problematic, because the file is stored in global search path for Python modules and therefore bears a higher risk of causing a conflict. Blocking that path, even for any module Python Standard Lib may want to include in the future, is not nice: $ rpmls -p python-cpopen-1.1-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm -rw-r--r-- /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpopen-1.1-py2.7.egg-info -rw-r--r-- /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpopen.py -rw-r--r-- /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpopen.pyc -rw-r--r-- /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpopen.pyo -> -rwxr-xr-x /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/createprocess.so That this theory is not too far off can be seen with a repoquery, which shows that there's at least one other python module that uses such a createprocess.so but stores it in a subdir (which is much more nice): # repoquery --whatprovides /usr/*python*createprocess.so vdsm-python-0:4.10.3-5.gitb005b54.fc19.x86_64 # repoquery -l vdsm-python|grep create /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/betterPopen/createprocess.so -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pYmF541q3U&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871511] Review Request: heimdall - Flash firmware on to Samsung Galaxy S devices
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871511 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- heimdall-1.4-0.3.rc2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/heimdall-1.4-0.3.rc2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=czz7QZEPxl&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886322] Review Request: mingw-nss - MinGW build of Network Security Services
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886322 --- Comment #2 from Marc-Andre Lureau --- And make sure wine binfmt is disabled! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gzHc29tqxU&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910142] Review Request: nodejs-send - Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910142 Jamie Nguyen changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Jamie Nguyen --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: nodejs-send Short Description: Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support Owners: jamielinux Branches: f18 el6 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gE9bCcYtl6&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 896011] Review Request: msitools - Windows Installer Tools
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896011 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=S7bJJ5nkXV&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 896011] Review Request: msitools - Windows Installer Tools
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896011 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System --- msitools-0.91-3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/msitools-0.91-3.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=b7GV2hWxov&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910142] Review Request: nodejs-send - Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910142 --- Comment #9 from Michael Schwendt --- Package Change Request == Package Name: nodejs-send New Branches: f18 el6 Owners: jamielinux InitialCC: Rationale: The request from comment 6 has not been processed for the Branches other than devel. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=f88bggIf8Y&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 914996] Review Request: gitstats - Generates statistics based on GIT repository activity
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=914996
--- Comment #7 from Stephen Gordon ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Hi Stephenm, here is my first comment iteration :)
>
> ===
>
> 1. bad spec naming?
>
> > Upstream have already updated to resolve this so I've updated the SPEC and
> > SRPM to pick this up. I also realized that there is .pod file provided which
> > can be used to generate the man page so that is now also included.
> >
> > Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats-0.2.spec
> > SRPM URL:
> > http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats-0.2-20130224git0843039.fc18.src.rpm
>
> Why do you now call the spec file gitstats-0.2.spec and not gitstats.spec?
> Your
> first specfile was called gitstats.spec..
I've actually had reviewers request that I do that in the past so they can see
the differences between the submitted files (rather than overwriting each
time).
> 2. unnecessary %attr() macros
>
> > $ cat *.spec
> > [...]
> > %files
> > %attr(755, root, root) %{_bindir}/%{name}
> ^^ none of these should be needed
Removed.
> 3. Missing release number
>
> > Release:%{checkout}%{?dist}
>
> I think that even the first release number should be specified. Partly
> because
> I (as a reviewer) can see, where it will be finally placed and because of
> this
> also:
>
> $ rpmdev-vercmp gitstats-0.2-20130224git0843039
> gitstats-0.2-1.20130224git0843039
> gitstats-0.2-20130224git0843039 > gitstats-0.2-1.20130224git0843039
I went back and reviewed the naming/versioning guidelines and have ended up
with names of the form gitstats-0-0.3.20130224git0843039. I reset the version
to 0 as this is effectively "pre-release software" (no formal releases) and use
the revision number to maintain the ordering as shown in the example:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages
> 4. (nit: I would create one-newline separator between changelog entries)
Done
> 5. Gzip inside BuildRequires is redundant .. it must be installed on minimum
>build system.
Removed
> Pavel
Thanks Pavel, updated files are here:
Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats.spec
SRPM URL:
http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats-0-0.3.20130224git0843039.fc18.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rOwuBPrChy&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912023] Review Request: python-oslo-config - OpenStack common configuration library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912023 Mark McLoughlin changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Mark McLoughlin --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-oslo-config New Branches: el6 Owners: markmc pbrady apevec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=wL0XKEmWgG&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915331] New: Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915331 Bug ID: 915331 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: dpie...@redhat.com Spec URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rubeyond.spec SRPM URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rubeyond-0.1-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Rubeyond provides addition general classes, mixins and functions to round out the standard library that ships with the Ruby language. Fedora Account System Username: mcpierce -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=L9UpqkMhZu&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915337] New: Review Request: nmon - Nigel's performance MONitor for Linux
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915337 Bug ID: 915337 Summary: Review Request: nmon - Nigel's performance MONitor for Linux Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Reporter: ravn...@gmail.com Spec URL: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bws3TZd4V12pejI2QXdxa2NTUzA/edit?usp=sharing SRPM URL: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bws3TZd4V12pY2RJcDRiaFV6WkE/edit?usp=sharing Description: This systems administrator, tuner, benchmark tool gives you a huge amount of performance information about CPU, memory, network, disks (mini graphs or numbers), file systems, NFS, top processes, resources (Linux version & processors), in one go. The information can be displayed either on screen or saved to a comma separated (csv) file. rpmlint: nmon.src: W: file-size-mismatch Documentation.txt = 255, http://downloads.sf.net/project/nmon/Documentation.txt = 262 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5053091 Fedora Account System Username: paller This is my first package and I am seeking a sponsor. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JIWxqdysua&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 914996] Review Request: gitstats - Generates statistics based on GIT repository activity
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=914996
--- Comment #8 from Pavel Raiskup ---
>> Why do you now call the spec file gitstats-0.2.spec and not gitstats.spec?
>> Your
>> first specfile was called gitstats.spec..
>
> I've actually had reviewers request that I do that in the past so they can
> see the differences between the submitted files (rather than overwriting
> each time).
This is off-topic, but the git (cgit) is able to do this for you - you are able
to post everytime the same link to spec file and the history is not lost.
>> 3. Missing release number
>>
>>[..]
>
> I went back and reviewed the naming/versioning guidelines and have ended up
> with names of the form gitstats-0-0.3.20130224git0843039. I reset the
> version to 0 as this is effectively "pre-release software" (no formal
> releases) and use the revision number to maintain the ordering as shown in
> the example:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages
Nice! Thanks for this fix. I missed that the 0.2 was not upstream version.
The N-V-R as you are using now is OK.
===
Another problems:
1. package should own all directories it creates
$ rpm -qf /usr/share/gitstats
file /usr/share/gitstats is not owned by any package
+ %dir {_datarootdir}/%{name} probably should be added
2. Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files
s/install/install -p/
Otherwise it seems to be ok to me. I'll re-run the fedora-review script and
post deep info when these are fixed.
Thanks for your work!
Pavel
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=YNvDZPL6Ts&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913152] Review Request: MUMPS - A MUltifrontal Massively Parallel sparse direct Solver
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913152 --- Comment #12 from Antonio Trande --- Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/MUMPS/MUMPS.spec SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/MUMPS/MUMPS-4.10.0-3.fc18.src.rpm - Following the upstream indications, I've linked openmpi header/libs files to build sequential version. This seems fix the examples' errors :D : $ mpirun -np 2 ./ssimpletest < input_simpletest_real Entering SMUMPS driver with JOB, N, NZ = 6 5 12 SMUMPS 4.10.0 L U Solver for unsymmetric matrices Type of parallelism: Working host ** ANALYSIS STEP ... Structural symmetry (in percent)= 92 Density: NBdense, Average, Median =021 ... No column permutation Ordering based on AMF Leaving analysis phase with ... INFOG(1) = 0 INFOG(2) = 0 -- (20) Number of entries in factors (estim.) = 15 -- (3) Storage of factors (REAL, estimated) = 15 -- (4) Storage of factors (INT , estimated) = 50 -- (5) Maximum frontal size (estimated) = 3 -- (6) Number of nodes in the tree = 3 -- (32) Type of analysis effectively used = 1 -- (7) Ordering option effectively used = 2 ICNTL(6) Maximum transversal option= 0 ICNTL(7) Pivot order option= 7 Percentage of memory relaxation (effective)= 20 Number of level 2 nodes= 0 Number of split nodes = 0 RINFOG(1) Operations during elimination (estim)= 1.900D+01 ** Rank of proc needing largest memory in IC facto: 0 ** Estimated corresponding MBYTES for IC facto: 1 ** Estimated avg. MBYTES per work. proc at facto (IC) : 1 ** TOTAL space in MBYTES for IC factorization : 2 ** Rank of proc needing largest memory for OOC facto : 0 ** Estimated corresponding MBYTES for OOC facto : 1 ** Estimated avg. MBYTES per work. proc at facto (OOC): 1 ** TOTAL space in MBYTES for OOC factorization: 2 ** FACTORIZATION STEP GLOBAL STATISTICS PRIOR NUMERICAL FACTORIZATION ... NUMBER OF WORKING PROCESSES = 2 OUT-OF-CORE OPTION (ICNTL(22)) = 0 REAL SPACE FOR FACTORS = 15 INTEGER SPACE FOR FACTORS= 50 MAXIMUM FRONTAL SIZE (ESTIMATED) = 3 NUMBER OF NODES IN THE TREE = 3 Convergence error after scaling for ONE-NORM (option 7/8) = 0.38D+00 Maximum effective relaxed size of S = 147 Average effective relaxed size of S = 143 GLOBAL TIME FOR MATRIX DISTRIBUTION = 0. ** Memory relaxation parameter ( ICNTL(14) ):20 ** Rank of processor needing largest memory in facto : 0 ** Space in MBYTES used by this processor for facto : 1 ** Avg. Space in MBYTES per working proc during facto: 1 ELAPSED TIME FOR FACTORIZATION = 0.0008 Maximum effective space used in S (KEEP8(67) = 12 Average effective space used in S (KEEP8(67) = 8 ** EFF Min: Rank of processor needing largest memory : 0 ** EFF Min: Space in MBYTES used by this processor : 1 ** EFF Min: Avg. Space in MBYTES per working proc: 1 GLOBAL STATISTICS RINFOG(2) OPERATIONS IN NODE ASSEMBLY = 2.000D+00 --(3) OPERATIONS IN NODE ELIMINATION= 1.900D+01 INFOG (9) REAL SPACE FOR FACTORS= 15 INFOG(10) INTEGER SPACE FOR FACTORS = 50 INFOG(11) MAXIMUM FRONT SIZE= 3 INFOG(29) NUMBER OF ENTRIES IN FACTORS = 15 INFOG(12) NB OF OFF DIAGONAL PIVOTS = 0 INFOG(13) NUMBER OF DELAYED PIVOTS = 0 INFOG(14) NUMBER OF MEMORY COMPRESS = 0 KEEP8(108) Extra copies IP stacking = 0 ** SOLVE & CHECK STEP STATISTICS PRIOR SOLVE PHASE ... NUMBER OF RIGHT-HAND-SIDES= 1 BLOCKING FACTOR FOR MULTIPLE RHS = 1 ICNTL (9) = 1 --- (10) = 0 --- (11) = 0 --- (20) = 0 --- (21) = 0 --- (30) = 0 ** Rank of processor needing largest memory in solve : 0 ** Space in MBYTES used by this processor for solve :
[Bug 915337] Review Request: nmon - Nigel's performance MONitor for Linux
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915337 Palle Ravn changed: What|Removed |Added Clone Of||524119 CC||ravn...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Ju2g0AukvS&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915337] Review Request: nmon - Nigel's performance MONitor for Linux
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915337 Terje Røsten changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) CC||dylan.sw...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Terje Røsten --- *** Bug 524119 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=V0F31zQLJe&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915087] Review Request: nodejs-chrono - Format dates in JavaScript
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915087 Michael Scherer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5N05Pbpkyn&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915087] Review Request: nodejs-chrono - Format dates in JavaScript
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915087
Michael Scherer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= 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]: 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 must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: 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]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed pa
[Bug 915087] Review Request: nodejs-chrono - Format dates in JavaScript
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915087 Tom Hughes changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Tom Hughes --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: nodejs-chrono Short Description: Format dates in JavaScript Owners: tomh Branches: f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LabbtktuK0&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 909471] Review Request: rubygem-openshift-origin-auth-remote-user - OpenShift plugin for remote-user authentication
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=909471 Michael Scherer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org --- Comment #2 from Michael Scherer --- Why is there a favicon in source2 ? ( since that's used only for test ? ) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=s6sZgvXPPH&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 907583] Review Request: python-sanction - A simple, lightweight OAuth2 client
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907583 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||915390 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9zYiu3mSjj&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908049] Review Request: python-django-longerusername - Make django auth.user username field longer
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908049 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||915390 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IjbxcgvqoR&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913152] Review Request: MUMPS - A MUltifrontal Massively Parallel sparse direct Solver
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913152 Paulo Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr ||a...@gmail.com --- Comment #13 from Paulo Andrade --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > (In reply to comment #9) > > > At this point, I'm blocked by my knowledges which are limited in this > > > field. > > > You think I had to study for a long time how Makefile.inc are used during > > > compilation and probably it would have not been so difficult for an expert > > > programmer. > > > > I think you should focus first on getting the examples > > to show something more helpful :-) The error messages > > ERROR in MPI_ALLREDUCE, DATATYPE= 7 > > are not much encouraging. > > > > Hi Paulo. Hi Antonio, > I have contacted maintainer team about this error: > https://listes.ens-lyon.fr/sympa/arc/mumps-users/2013-02/msg00030.html > > This error may be tied with the fake 'mpi.h' file included in the source. > > I think I'm not able to take on these issues, if you want take this package, > I would agree. > Or in case I can co-maintain it with you. You can do it :-) I even assigned the bug to myself so I could act as your sponsor. I suggest you add a %check in the spec, somewhat like: %check module load mpi LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD:../libmumps_seq:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH ./ssimpletest < input_simpletest_real LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD:../lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH mpirun -np 2 ./ssimpletest < input_simpletest_real I think it should also have some proper clarification of when and how libmpiseq-4.10.0.so is used, also, it does not have a "simpler" libmpiseq.so symlink to it like the other libraries generated. Is it really required to generate the "sequential" mumps in the Fedora environment? If yes, maybe should also make a different examples build exercising it. If not, probably could simplify significantly the spec by making only the "non sequential" build. About the blacs_gridexit_ it is defined at: $ objdump -T /usr/lib64/openmpi/lib/libmpiblacs.so.1| grep blacs_gridexit_ 9d40 gDF .text 0103 Baseblacs_gridexit_ and libzmumps.so is linked to it, so, it looks more likely rpmlint does not resolve it because it did not run "module load mpi" in its environment. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=n1wg16AyJK&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 907583] Review Request: python-sanction - A simple, lightweight OAuth2 client
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907583 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-02-25 11:25:22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=0Om4LGfWCe&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908049] Review Request: python-django-longerusername - Make django auth.user username field longer
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908049 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-02-25 11:25:33 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8nF57leDJu&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908114] Review Request: python-pillow - Python image processing library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908114 --- Comment #16 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi --- Still to fix: * CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" Should remain even though we've removed -fno-strict-aliasing. * -fno-strict-aliasing was removed from the python3 section but also needs to be removed from the python2 build section. * After thinking on it more, I think the comment about how to retrieve the sources really does belong right above the Source0 line. That doesn't preclude having another comment explaining the %globals if you want. Everything else fixed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=USS3Bop4N9&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 909471] Review Request: rubygem-openshift-origin-auth-remote-user - OpenShift plugin for remote-user authentication
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=909471 --- Comment #3 from Troy Dawson --- That was to get rid of the rpmlint empty file errors. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nC1Ijs1TVE&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908842] Review Request: python-subunit - Python implementation of subunit test streaming protocol
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||913200 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=f06yzZ1WxC&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913200] Review Request: python-testrepository - A repository of test results
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913200 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||908842 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=S65SFBJ5On&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915427] New: Review Request: python-zc-customdoctests - Use doctest with other languages
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915427
Bug ID: 915427
Summary: Review Request: python-zc-customdoctests - Use doctest
with other languages
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severity: unspecified
Priority: unspecified
Reporter: rb...@redhat.com
Spec URL: http://ralph.fedorapeople.org//python-zc-customdoctests.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ralph.fedorapeople.org//python-zc-customdoctests-1.0.1-1.fc18.src.rpm
Description:
doctest (and recently manuel) provide hooks for using custom doctest
parsers. `zc.customdoctests` helps to leverage this to support other
languages, such as JavaScript::
js> function double (x) { ... return x*2; ... } js> double(2) 4
And with `manuel `_, it facilitates
doctests that mix multiple languages, such as Python, JavaScript, and sh.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ScyFOgzrZD&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915427] Review Request: python-zc-customdoctests - Use doctest with other languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915427 --- Comment #1 from Ralph Bean --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5054458 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6PlM1cTI7n&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915427] Review Request: python-zc-customdoctests - Use doctest with other languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915427 --- Comment #2 from Ralph Bean --- This is required for the test suite for python-zdaemon. It is disabled temporarily while this is under review. It should be re-enabled once this is in. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6fODuXB9IR&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 755065] Review Request: python-sqlalchemy0.7 - compat package
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755065 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed|2011-12-01 19:01:55 |2013-02-25 13:11:25 --- Comment #14 from Alan Pevec --- I didn't need to change Status for SCM request. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=eQh2j5puTX&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 893165] Review Request: mod_qos - Quality of service module for Apache
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893165 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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=MvudW7P5Qi&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 893165] Review Request: mod_qos - Quality of service module for Apache
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893165 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- mod_qos-10.13-4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=jQxG2bBJUv&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913296] Review Request: salt-api - An API to the salt management and remote execution system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913296 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Niemantsverdriet --- Spec URL: http://kaptk2.fedorapeople.org/salt-api.spec SRPM URL: http://kaptk2.fedorapeople.org/salt-api-0.7.5-1.fc18.src.rpm Updated the .spec and SRPM as suggested by the comments -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qrkUw1WqGp&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908842] Review Request: python-subunit - Python implementation of subunit test streaming protocol
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ape...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ape...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=vtIUeJZ6sM&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913296] Review Request: salt-api - An API to the salt management and remote execution system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913296 --- Comment #8 from Clint Savage --- Andrew, You need to increment the the Release value and update your changelog to match. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zkyJ14zSMW&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913296] Review Request: salt-api - An API to the salt management and remote execution system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913296 --- Comment #9 from Andrew Niemantsverdriet --- (In reply to comment #8) > Andrew, > > You need to increment the the Release value and update your changelog to > match. Spec URL: http://kaptk2.fedorapeople.org/salt-api.spec SRPM URL: http://kaptk2.fedorapeople.org/salt-api-0.7.5-2.fc18.src.rpm Sorry fixed now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=A9sLcsIWCl&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910527] Review Request: kshisen - Shisen-Sho Mahjongg-like tile game
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910527 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: kshisen Short Description: Shisen-Sho Mahjongg-like tile game Owners: than rdieter jreznik kkofler ltinkl rnovacek Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rWjghZnSZI&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910485] Review Request: kajongg - Classical Mah Jongg game for four players
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910485 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: kajongg Short Description: Classical Mah Jongg game for four players Owners: than rdieter jreznik kkofler ltinkl rnovacek Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kVS60RrEe6&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908842] Review Request: python-subunit - Python implementation of subunit test streaming protocol
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(pbr...@redhat.com
||)
--- Comment #1 from Alan Pevec ---
tldr:
licensing clarification
bundled iso8601
BR python2-devel
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[!]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
ASL 2.0 was choosen for packaging, README says Apache 2.0 or BSD 3-clause,
points to COPYING which is not included in the source tarball, and few source
files have different license header, see below.
[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.
[!]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
bundles and patches iso8601
- upstream seems dead
- add this patch in python-iso8601 RPM, if essential
[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
[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.
[ ]: 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. Licenses found:
"GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)",
"Unknown or generated".
* GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)
python-subunit-0.0.10/python/subunit/tests/TestUtil.py
Not sure that GPL can blend into ASL 2.0, quickfix: remove all tests and this
from RPM?
* MIT/X11 (BSD like)
python-subunit-0.0.10/python/subunit/iso8601.py
This bundled lib and should be replaced with python-iso8601 dependency.
* Unknown or generated
python-subunit-0.0.10/setup.py
Covered by README.
[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.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
* add python-iso8601 dep, after removing bundled iso8601.py
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[!]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
BR python2-devel
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package
[Bug 908842] Review Request: python-subunit - Python implementation of subunit test streaming protocol
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2TWdsPnXYn&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908842] Review Request: python-subunit - Python implementation of subunit test streaming protocol
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842 Alan Pevec changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=isLQDQSH0I&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910793] Review Request: spice-html5 - Javascript SPICE client
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910793 --- Comment #16 from Jeremy White --- I've switched to hosting the binaries on fdo, and have a new build here: Spec URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~jwhite/spice-html5/spice-html5.spec SRPM URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~jwhite/spice-html5/spice-html5-0.1.2-1.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=aKY8UBFhsL&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913296] Review Request: salt-api - An API to the salt management and remote execution system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913296 --- Comment #10 from Clint Savage --- Your changelog should detail the changes. Seeing as this document will likely have more suggestions, I wouldn't point to a link about the review :) If you do want to put a pointer to an issue, you can do something like (RHBZ#913296), for instance. It's a very common shorthand. I've run the fedora-review again and the suggestions we made look good, otherwise. Thomas, do you have any other suggestions? And are you a packager sponsor? Andrew is going to need one as I am just doing the review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=htunUXYBDq&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915005] Review Request: qt5-qttools - Qt5 - QtTool components
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915005 Gregor Tätzner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gre...@freenet.de Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gre...@freenet.de -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VPB9ODNosC&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915006] Review Request: qt5-qtwebkit - Qt5 - QtWebKit components
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915006 Gregor Tätzner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gre...@freenet.de Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gre...@freenet.de -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8iWu0ALFTd&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910148] Review Request: nodejs-connect - High performance middleware framework for Node.js
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910148
Tom Hughes changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|t...@compton.nu
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #4 from Tom Hughes ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
I'm seeing 11 test failures when the tests are enabled.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
Per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js#Installing_Modules
the images should I believe be installed in %{_datadir}?
Also, should lib-cov be installed? It's just a copy of lib annotated
for coverage testing isn't it?
= 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
[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.
[!]: 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. 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 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
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check c
[Bug 913152] Review Request: MUMPS - A MUltifrontal Massively Parallel sparse direct Solver
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913152 --- Comment #14 from Antonio Trande --- (In reply to comment #13) > > You can do it :-) > > I even assigned the bug to myself so I could act as your sponsor. Great ! :D > > I suggest you add a %check in the spec, somewhat like: > > %check > module load mpi > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD:../libmumps_seq:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH ./ssimpletest < > input_simpletest_real > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD:../lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH mpirun -np 2 ./ssimpletest < > input_simpletest_real Done. Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/MUMPS/MUMPS.spec SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/MUMPS/MUMPS-4.10.0-3.fc18.src.rpm > > I think it should also have some proper clarification of when and > how libmpiseq-4.10.0.so is used, also, it does not have a "simpler" > libmpiseq.so symlink to it like the other libraries generated. Is it > really required to generate the "sequential" mumps in the Fedora > environment? > If yes, maybe should also make a different examples build exercising it. > If not, probably could simplify significantly the spec by making only > the "non sequential" build. Well, this is what's reported in README file: Sequential version -- You can use the parallel MPI version of MUMPS on a single processor. If you only plan to use MUMPS on a uniprocessor machine, and do not want to install parallel libraries such as MPI, ScaLAPACK, etc... then it might be more convenient to use one of the Makefile..SEQ to build a sequential version of MUMPS instead of a parallel one. It seems me that can be used the only parallel version. Hold the sequential one can be an option. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3qkfrMVxEz&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913296] Review Request: salt-api - An API to the salt management and remote execution system
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913296 --- Comment #11 from Clint Savage --- Oh, I missed that Andrew is already a packager. Never mind on the sponsor part. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1ywmKoOzdc&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 908114] Review Request: python-pillow - Python image processing library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908114 --- Comment #17 from Sandro Mani --- Spec URL: http://smani.fedorapeople.org/python-pillow.spec SRPM URL: http://smani.fedorapeople.org/python-pillow-1.7.8-3.20130210gite09ff61.fc19.src.rpm * Mon Feb 25 2013 Sandro Mani - 1.7.8-3.20130210gite09ff61 - Really remove -fno-strict-aliasing - Place comment on how to retreive source just above the Source0 line For the python 3 variant, is there anything I can do? My comments in bug #889784 have so far been ignored, and also a message I posted on fedora-devel some time ago. Also, I wanted to mention: I didn't find any reference to the python_version and python3_version standard macros in the python packaging guidelines, maybe they could be added to the table at [1]? [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=dbFzIKVVTx&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915484] New: Review Request: nodejs-zipfile - C++ library for handling zipfiles in node
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915484 Bug ID: 915484 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-zipfile - C++ library for handling zipfiles in node Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Reporter: t...@compton.nu Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-zipfile.spec SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-zipfile-0.3.4-1.fc18.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: tomh Description: Bindings to libzip for handling zipfile archives in node. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=SIYAd5XL3S&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915488] New: Review Request: nodejs-sqlite3 - Asynchronous, non-blocking SQLite3 bindings for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915488 Bug ID: 915488 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-sqlite3 - Asynchronous, non-blocking SQLite3 bindings for Node.js Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Reporter: t...@compton.nu Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-sqlite3.spec SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-sqlite3-2.1.5-1.fc18.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: tomh Description: Asynchronous, non-blocking SQLite3 bindings for node.js 0.2-0.4 (versions 2.0.x), 0.6.13+ and 0.8.x (versions 2.1.x). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=jljd4Re3hm&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ 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
Gregor Tätzner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review-
--- Comment #44 from Gregor Tätzner ---
Spec URL: http://brummbq.fedorapeople.org/owncloud.spec
SRPM URL: http://brummbq.fedorapeople.org/owncloud-4.5.7-2.fc17.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #43)
> # removed any occurences of jslint
> Source0:%{name}-%{version}-repack.tar.bz2
>
> SHOULD: so tarball creation is readily reproducible and verifiable, please
> include more detail on what what excluded exactly or (ideally) include a
> script to do it.
see new bash script in the srpm, am I supposed to ship that?
>
>
> 2. scriptlets: mostly ok, but
>
> SHOULD: for f18+ consider following macro'ized systemd scriptlets per
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd
disagreed, I'm just reloading httpd in the sub-package. Those macros seem to do
all kind of fancy stuff
>
>
> 3. runtime: (apparently?) not OK. followed owncloud-README.fedora,
> installed, pointed browser at http://localhost/owncloud/, and get 403
> Forbidden Error
bad rdieter, you're using httpd 2.4 ;)
have not tested on F18 yet, but should work now
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hYAGaMGxKW&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915074] Review Request: fedocal - A web based calendar application
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915074 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rb...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Ralph Bean --- For some reason the following just hangs: $ wget https://fedorahosted.org/releases/f/e/fedocal/fedocal-0.1.0.tar.gz Any idea why Pierre? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PghkqRpHi5&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910148] Review Request: nodejs-connect - High performance middleware framework for Node.js
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910148
--- Comment #5 from Jamie Nguyen ---
> [!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
>
> I'm seeing 11 test failures when the tests are enabled.
Hmm, indeed my notes seem to say the same. Sorry, I must have forgotten about
this. Will try to fix.
> [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
>
> Per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js#Installing_Modules
> the images should I believe be installed in %{_datadir}?
Yes I believe you're right.
> Also, should lib-cov be installed? It's just a copy of lib annotated
> for coverage testing isn't it?
Correct. I thought I'd removed that from all of my review requests. A grep of
my specs seems to confirm this is the only case where I forgot!
New Spec/SRPM coming soon.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PEIke9zs5A&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 907027] Review Request: rapidxml - Fast XML parser
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907027 Volker Fröhlich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||volke...@gmx.at --- Comment #1 from Volker Fröhlich --- Hm, that file is actually part of boost-devel already, as mentioned on http://rapidxml.sourceforge.net. It could be considered a bundle there. I'd suggest to discuss that with the boost maintainers, in case you haven't already. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=csXSu7hMOB&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 913152] Review Request: MUMPS - A MUltifrontal Massively Parallel sparse direct Solver
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913152
--- Comment #15 from Paulo Andrade
---
You should bump the release for every review request update,
that is, the last one should be Release 4.
Things that still should be done include:
1. You added
sed -e 's|@@CFLAGS@@|%{optflags}|g' -i Makefile.inc
to the spec as I suggested, but it is pointless, because
SOURCE1 (Makefile.seq.inc) and SOURCE2 (Makefile.par.inc)
still hardcode CFLAGS, that is, you should change those
to the pseudo patch:
-OPTC= -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
-fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4
+OPTC= -@@CFLAGS@@
2. Following above, the OPTF variable should also use
%{optflags}, and not the hardcoded "-O -Dintel_ -DALLOW_NON_INIT"
that is, should replace the -O with %{optflags}.
3. The variable OPTL appears to be the best place to use
-Wl,-as-needed, that is, the pseudo patch:
-OPTL= -O
-OPTL= -Wl,-as-needed
About the sequential vs parallel versions, it may not be a
runtime choice, so, should also build a version of the examples
using it the "seq" libraries, and test them. Should be something
like:
cp -ar examples examples.seq
sed -e 's|libdir = $(topdir)/lib|libdir = $(topdir)/libmums_seq' -i
examples.seq/Makefile
This would also need some extra patching to add a
examples.seq target to the toplevel Makefile. Oterhwise,
you cannot know if the sequential packages and libraries
are functional. I can see the "seq" libraries as an
option when there is no functional mpi, otherwise, I
think it would be easier to just build the parallel
version.
Either way, I think it is doing a bogus build in the
libmumps_seq directory, because, if I understand it
correctly, libmpiseq-4.10.0.so should be a wrapper
to not need to link to the mpi libraries, but every
other library in that directory is linked to the
mpi libraries. And these chunks are duplicated
in the spec for the "seq" and "par" builds:
MUMPS_MPI=openmpi
MUMPS_INCDIR=-I/usr/include/openmpi-%{_arch}
MUMPS_LIBF77="\
-L%{_libdir}/openmpi -L%{_libdir}/openmpi/lib \
-lmpi_f77 -lmpi -lopen-rte \
-lopen-pal -lscalapack -lmpiblacs \
-lmpiblacsF77init -lmpiblacsCinit -llapack"
make MUMPS_MPI="$MUMPS_MPI" \
MUMPS_INCDIR="$MUMPS_INCDIR" \
MUMPS_LIBF77="$MUMPS_LIBF77" \
all
Maybe the libraries should not be explicitly
linked to the mpi libraries? And only actual
binaries linked to; hmm, sanity tells it should
be other way around to allow runtime choice, so,
the MUMPS-seq package should include the libraries
in the libmumps_seq directory (and those cannot be
linked to mpi, but to libmpiseq-4.10.0.so), and then,
have the 2 packages conflict with each other, or
use alternatives or environment-modules to allow
both to be installed at the same time.
Long history short, for the sake of review, I would
be satisfied if you do the simpler approach of
dropping the "seq" build, and only do the "par"
build.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=thaVhR2hIP&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 755065] Review Request: python-sqlalchemy0.7 - compat package
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755065 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla --- It's orphaned, not retired, you can pick it up in pkgdb. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IOJRqJTiQd&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910142] Review Request: nodejs-send - Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910142 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=au2ZWB35IE&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910441] Review Request: perl-POSIX-AtFork - Hook registrations at fork(2)
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910441 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=p8bR3RjY2W&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910485] Review Request: kajongg - Classical Mah Jongg game for four players
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910485 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZtoOX1WJ6N&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910527] Review Request: kshisen - Shisen-Sho Mahjongg-like tile game
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910527 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gheOpgvfjb&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912023] Review Request: python-oslo-config - OpenStack common configuration library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912023 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8e8LTo231B&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915087] Review Request: nodejs-chrono - Format dates in JavaScript
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915087 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CDPfZkbHrC&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 907027] Review Request: rapidxml - Fast XML parser
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907027 --- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok --- Thnaks for letting me know, will talk to them. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=07XGMjysGa&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 830458] The afraid-dyndns package is competely broekn
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830458 Joao M. S. Silva changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmss Flags||needinfo?(e...@arix.com) --- Comment #5 from Joao M. S. Silva --- I just lost a few hours thinking that I hadn't configured /etc/afraid-dyndns.conf correctly. I think this should be corrected or removed from the repos. Can someone advance which one will be? Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Jz1Yx01hEe&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911235] Review Request: nodejs-eyes - A customizable value inspector for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911235 Tom Hughes changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||t...@compton.nu Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2013-02-25 19:30:50 --- Comment #1 from Tom Hughes --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 911030 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PSNnPRjaWo&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 914996] Review Request: gitstats - Generates statistics based on GIT repository activity
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=914996 --- Comment #9 from Stephen Gordon --- Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgordon/gitstats-0-0.4.20130224git0843039.fc18.src.rpm * Mon Feb 25 2013 Stephen Gordon 0-0.4-20130224git0843039 - Added /usr/share/gitstats to files list. - Added -p argument to install invocation to preserve timestamps. - Use release macro in pod2man arguments instead of rebuilding the equivalent again using the other macros. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=E8bFrhugOa&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911030] Review Request: nodejs-eyes - A customizable value inspector for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911030 --- Comment #7 from Tom Hughes --- *** Bug 911235 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=45vbQ9lTbH&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 907027] Review Request: rapidxml - Fast XML parser
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907027 Petr Machata changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pmach...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Petr Machata --- This indeed does look like bundling. RapidXML is not a part of Boost API, it seems to be an implementation detail, much like e.g. ICU is. I'll look into what the motivation was for doing it this way, and whether decoupling the two would be reasonable. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2hccpCRbPQ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 830458] The afraid-dyndns package is competely broekn
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830458 Erick Calder changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Flags|needinfo?(e...@arix.com) | Last Closed||2013-02-25 21:06:34 --- Comment #6 from Erick Calder --- Jacobo/Joao, there have been many fixes made since the package went to the repos. the latest good copy is at the link I posted before on github. I need somebody to repackage it for me because I no longer know how to. it shouldn't be so difficult to do for someone who knows how to do it because it's a very vanilla solution. - erick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rdGRWymPO2&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 830458] The afraid-dyndns package is competely broekn
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830458 --- Comment #7 from Erick Calder --- ok, I've followed the instructions Paul was kind to provide and released ownership of all the branches for this package. if anyone could maintain this package by following the source on github I'd be grateful. the source is here: https://github.com/ekkis/afraid-dyndns -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UsN2EXBc9s&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 828444] Review Request: drupal6-context_menu_block - Context Menu Block Module for Drupal6
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828444 Shawn Iwinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||shawn.iwin...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(whe...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #1 from Shawn Iwinski --- Wesley -- Do you plan on completing this review? If not, I can take it. Shawn -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fZczxVOUR1&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 828849] Review Request: drupal6-faq - FAQ Module for Drupal6
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828849 Shawn Iwinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||shawn.iwin...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(whe...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #7 from Shawn Iwinski --- Wesley -- Do you plan on completing this review? If not, I can take it. Shawn -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kEN7n78FDM&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 896011] Review Request: msitools - Windows Installer Tools
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896011 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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=jcSauMHefh&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 896011] Review Request: msitools - Windows Installer Tools
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896011 --- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System --- msitools-0.91-3.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RliPGfNDNH&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 903829] Review Request: perl-Time-Interval - Convert seconds to human readable form
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903829 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Time-Interval-1.232-1.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=a8B4SyMfoC&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911181] Review Request: nodejs-growl - Growl unobtrusive notifications for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911181 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-growl-1.7.0-2.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=q2NZkng96r&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911181] Review Request: nodejs-growl - Growl unobtrusive notifications for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911181 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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=tNE1wlm8Lw&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911187] Review Request: nodejs-ms - Tiny milliseconds conversion utility for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911187 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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=uByjfugLMt&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911187] Review Request: nodejs-ms - Tiny milliseconds conversion utility for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911187 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-ms-0.5.0-2.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=408z5gN8Mb&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 904329] Review Request: perl-Data-Validate-Domain - Domain validation methods
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904329 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Data-Validate-Domain-0.10-1.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WJG7q3qxjZ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871511] Review Request: heimdall - Flash firmware on to Samsung Galaxy S devices
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871511 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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kQIn5MDfHt&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871511] Review Request: heimdall - Flash firmware on to Samsung Galaxy S devices
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871511 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- heimdall-1.4-0.3.rc2.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HaAjCPghcT&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 904328] Review Request: perl-Config-ApacheFormat - Use Apache format config files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904328 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Config-ApacheFormat-1.2-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3pPvhioxTM&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
