[Bug 963292] Review Request: perl-SOOT - Use ROOT from Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963292 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- You are right. Updated package is at the same locator. -- 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=yf9MPgMX3ma=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745515] Review Request: yuicompressor - Tool that supports the compression of both JavaScript and CSS files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745515 --- Comment #20 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- p.s. yuicompressor development is stopped? That's, what I thought. Taking a second look, it turned out, developers are active https://github.com/yui/yuicompressor -- 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=SG8ws1izMua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895166] Review Request: rubygem-zbxapi - Ruby wrapper to the Zabbix API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895166 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jstri...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- This won't work in F19, please update it according to the latest packaging guidelines[1]. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby -- 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=fhhu8cr7U0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 963292] Review Request: perl-SOOT - Use ROOT from Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963292 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- --- a/perl-SOOT.spec +++ b/perl-SOOT.spec @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ BuildRequires: perl(File::Basename) BuildRequires: perl(overload) BuildRequires: perl(XSLoader) # Tests: +BuildRequires: perl(constant) BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `perl -V:version`; echo $version)) Requires: perl(Carp) = 1.01 -- Approving. -- 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=tUa5nhzFVJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912681] Review Request: canl-java - EMI Common Authentication library - bindings for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912681 František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||val...@civ.zcu.cz Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|val...@civ.zcu.cz 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=t45hsSVaLja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967485] Review Request: nf3d - GANTT-style visualization for Netfilter connections and logged packets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967485 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- NEW: Spec URL: http://cicku.me/nf3d.spec SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/nf3d-0.8-1.fc20.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=JIrUIn5PPLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967568] Review Request: mintmenu - Advanced Menu for the MATE Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967568 --- Comment #5 from Wolfgang Ulbrich chat-to...@raveit.de --- New mock build. * Tue May 28 2013 Wolfgang Ulbrich chat-to...@raveit.de - 5.4.9-4 - add runtime require mate-menu-editor - remove require -lang subpackage - remove virtual provides -lang subpackage - simplify rpm scriptlets - add comment to license line Spec URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/Mate/SPECS/mintmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/Mate/SRPM/mintmenu-5.4.9-4.fc20.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=m2UgMKhTXCa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967332] Review Request: rubygem-chardet - Character encoding auto-detection in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967332 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jstri...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jstri...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- I will take it for a 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=nMSqUN2JNZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 831929] Review Request: grub-customizer - Grub Customizer is a graphical interface to configure the grub2/burg settings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=831929 --- Comment #13 from Vasiliy Glazov vasc...@gmail.com --- Bugreport submited to upstream https://bugs.launchpad.net/grub-customizer/+bug/1184976 -- 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=6vD0ZoC7Tia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967332] Review Request: rubygem-chardet - Character encoding auto-detection in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967332 --- Comment #3 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- From your spec file: ``` # URL: http://blog.vava.cn/ # This URL is mentioned in the Gem but doesn't open URL: https://github.com/janx/chardet ``` The original chardet gem is actually hosted on RubyForge[1] and maintained by Hui Zheng. The release is from 2006 and I don't see any new development or updates here. The URL you are mentioning belongs to chardet2[2], which is pretty new, it's based on chardet and seems to be maintained. Apart from that I am unsure whether is chardet Ruby 2.0 ready or not, since I can see that there is a commit regarding Ruby 2.0 compatibility in chardet2[3]. Fedora 19 will use Ruby 2.0 as a default and it would be pointless to package a sort-of dead project that wasn't tested on Ruby 2.0 (although backporting of the above mentioned commit could solve it). Is there a reason to package this gem? Wouldn't be better to bring chardet2 to Fedora? [1] http://rubyforge.org/projects/chardet/ [2] https://rubygems.org/gems/chardet2 [3] https://github.com/janx/chardet2/commit/32cc6147b2e519eb3bd777e0bc854b5bfac11ecd -- 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=megKgKVc8pa=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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913200 Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kcham...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kcham...@redhat.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=s1ar4svK9ha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 951777] Review Request: python-pygal - A python svg graph plotting library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951777 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-05-28 09:03:33 --- Comment #12 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com --- All stable. -- 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=xRvWPbK8Zga=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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913200 --- Comment #2 from Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com --- 1/ Running fedora-review tool against rawhide fails w/ RPM build errors: $ fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --rpm-spec -n ../SRPMS/python-testrepository-0.0.15-1.fc18.src.rpm fails with: (from - /home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-testrepository/results/build.log) -- . . Traceback (most recent call last): File setup.py, line 16, in module from setuptools import setup ImportError: No module named setuptools RPM build errors: error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.w0YBti (%build) Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.w0YBti (%build) Child return code was: 1 EXCEPTION: Command failed. See logs for output. # ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target x86_64 --nodeps builddir/build/SPECS/python-testrepository.spec'] Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py, line 70, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/mockbuild/util.py, line 359, in do raise mockbuild.exception.Error, (Command failed. See logs for output.\n # %s % (command,), child.returncode) Error: Command failed. See logs for output. # ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target x86_64 --nodeps builddir/build/SPECS/python-testrepository.spec'] LEAVE do -- EXCEPTION RAIS -- Is the above due to python-3/python-2 ? 2/ However, running against Fedora-18, succeeds: -- $ fedora-review --rpm-spec -n ../SRPMS/python-testrepository-0.0.15-1.fc18.src.rpm INFO: Processing local files: ../SRPMS/python-testrepository-0.0.15-1.fc18.src.rpm INFO: Getting .spec and .srpm Urls from : Local files in /home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS INFO: -- SRPM url: file:///home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-testrepository-0.0.15-1.fc18.src.rpm INFO: Using review directory: /home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-testrepository INFO: -- Spec url: file:///home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-testrepository/srpm-unpacked/python-testrepository.spec INFO: Downloading (Source0): http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/t/testrepository/testrepository-0.0.15.tar.gz INFO: Running checks and generating report INFO: Results and/or logs in: /home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-testrepository/results INFO: WARNING: Probably non-rawhide buildroot used. Rawhide should be used for most package reviews INFO: Build completed INFO: Installing built package(s) INFO: Install command returned error code 30 INFO: Starting new HTTPS connection (1): admin.fedoraproject.org INFO: Starting new HTTPS connection (1): admin.fedoraproject.org Review template in: /home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-testrepository/review.txt fedora-review is automated tool, but *YOU* are responsible for manually reviewing the results and finishing the review. Do not just copy-paste the results without understanding them. -- Proceeding with manual review with the above. -- 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=qoDwlzBRZya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 952355] Review Request: hovercraft - Makes impress.js presentations from reStructuredText
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=952355 Bug 952355 depends on bug 951711, which changed state. Bug 951711 Summary: Review Request: impressjs - Javascript presentation framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951711 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- 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=plt5R2CdKBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 951711] Review Request: impressjs - Javascript presentation framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951711 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-05-28 09:17:05 --- Comment #21 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com --- All stable. -- 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=IzhWJpG3hVa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910235] Review Request: python-pygeoip - Pure Python GeoIP API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910235 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-05-28 09:18:03 --- Comment #15 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com --- All stable. -- 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=z9FB1dxZ64a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 959509] Review Request: trac10 - Enhanced wiki and issue tracking system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959509 Seth Kress kre...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kre...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Seth Kress kre...@gmail.com --- If it helps, I have used the RPM posted (changes requested not included) and have been testing it for a few weeks. I have setup 2 new environments and migrated one trac .12 envronment up to 1.0. No anomolies experianced. Hope this helps. -- 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=2aot9kTI1da=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867287] Review Request: glite-jobid-api-cpp - C++ API handling gLite jobid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867287 --- Comment #5 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz --- Spec URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/glite-jobid-api-cpp-1.3.6-2/glite-jobid-api-cpp.spec SRPM URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/glite-jobid-api-cpp-1.3.6-2/glite-jobid-api-cpp-1.3.6-2.fc20.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5432941 New packaging - the noarch package and fixed file list. It looks like the -devel dependencies in noarch packages are covered in guidelines: ...unless the generated RPMs will be noarch, -devel package dependencies on other -devel packages should be arch-specific. -- 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=Rd42lVJR8ea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 865890] Review Request: concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru - A ConcurrentLinkedHashMap for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865890 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mFyIPMFKE4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 854670] Review Request: libjpeg-turbo - A MMX/SSE2 accelerated library for manipulating JPEG image files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=854670 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | -- 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=IF84YMtOCNa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956201] Review Request: nifti2dicom - Converts 3D medical images to DICOM 2D series
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956201 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=TjbA9XOT1ba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956201] Review Request: nifti2dicom - Converts 3D medical images to DICOM 2D series
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956201 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qFq90GMepEa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957930] Review Request: nodejs-agentkeepalive - Missing keepalive http.Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957930 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=YvcE727jj2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957930] Review Request: nodejs-agentkeepalive - Missing keepalive http.Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957930 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DxRiKgMofaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956737] Review Request: recoverjpeg - Recover jpeg pictures and mov movies from damaged devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956737 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Wbm8KtZdsGa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957934] Review Request: nodejs-tilelive - Frontend for various tile backends, mapnik and mbtiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957934 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=g4zzfrsN5sa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957934] Review Request: nodejs-tilelive - Frontend for various tile backends, mapnik and mbtiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957934 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=EfrIJE9ScFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 964143] Review Request: python-testscenarios - Testscenarios, a pyunit extension for dependency injection
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964143 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8JlHTPyHcGa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 964143] Review Request: python-testscenarios - Testscenarios, a pyunit extension for dependency injection
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964143 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=0Wszm1MMmda=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 966156] Review Request: prwd - A tool can print reduced working directory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966156 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hyJBY16a75a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956737] Review Request: recoverjpeg - Recover jpeg pictures and mov movies from damaged devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956737 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=sXxeBImyDTa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 966156] Review Request: prwd - A tool can print reduced working directory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966156 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=wHytytDdbIa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967153] Review Request: phrel - Per Host RatE Limiter
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967153 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=h0LSH78my9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967153] Review Request: phrel - Per Host RatE Limiter
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967153 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WGPT8rnpWza=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957932] Review Request: nodejs-tilejson - Tile source backend for online tile sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957932 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JWW7VwG6Cta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967689] Review Request: tsung - A distributed multi-protocol load testing tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967689 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lemen...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com --- I'll review it -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HtLaR7U7p9a=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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842 Alan Pevec ape...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ape...@redhat.com, ||pbr...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(pbr...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #5 from Alan Pevec ape...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Pádraig Brady from comment #4) Mock build fails in %check: ImportError: No module named iso8601 ImportError: No module named testtools ImportError: No module named testtools.compat Those need to be added as BRs -- 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=zYX5qtsA4Ha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967568] Review Request: mintmenu - Advanced Menu for the MATE Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967568 --- Comment #6 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- Hi Wolfgang, = MUST items = [!]: 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. Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text Please ask to upstream for include the text of the license (boilerplate), upstream only have to put on a branch on github, and you download it from there and put it in sourceX, Only fix that and approve it -- 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=sV83F8n767a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957932] Review Request: nodejs-tilejson - Tile source backend for online tile sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957932 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=bZRIy7Trpea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962160] Review Request: iipsrv - Light-weight streaming for viewing and zooming of ultra high-resolution images
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962160 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rsssQI8nrca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967396] Review Request: rubygem-chosen-rails - Integrate Chosen JavaScript library with Rails asset pipeline
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967396 --- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- * LICENSE should be marked as %doc * Gemfile and Rakefile should be in the -doc sub-package rather than excluded * README.md should be moved to the -doc sub-package as it's not require during run-time Other than that I tested it with a simple generated app and everything seems to be fine. Please fix the issues above and I will approve. -- 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=wofhBo3caNa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962160] Review Request: iipsrv - Light-weight streaming for viewing and zooming of ultra high-resolution images
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962160 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2cCNYccyHua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962160] Review Request: iipsrv - Light-weight streaming for viewing and zooming of ultra high-resolution images
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962160 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.el6 -- 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=QTswpqd1AMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962160] Review Request: iipsrv - Light-weight streaming for viewing and zooming of ultra high-resolution images
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962160 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.el5 -- 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=i58TydV1Qea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962160] Review Request: iipsrv - Light-weight streaming for viewing and zooming of ultra high-resolution images
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962160 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.fc19 -- 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=zF2MhzdiCza=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962160] Review Request: iipsrv - Light-weight streaming for viewing and zooming of ultra high-resolution images
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962160 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iipsrv-1.0.0-0.7.git0b63de7.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=jyDZDdFURna=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962160] Review Request: iipsrv - Light-weight streaming for viewing and zooming of ultra high-resolution images
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962160 --- Comment #16 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=vnG88iYbWLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962029] Review Request: libdbusmenu - A library that pulling out some code out of indicator-applet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962029 Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: libdbusmenu Short Description: A library that pulling out some code out of indicator-applet Owners: echevemaster Branches: f17 f18 f19 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=oVIbazj0s0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962029] Review Request: libdbusmenu - A library that pulling out some code out of indicator-applet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962029 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=A8X3WqtgNka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962029] Review Request: libdbusmenu - A library that pulling out some code out of indicator-applet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962029 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9C2blj0Qaxa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912110] Review Request: nodejs-watchit - A sensible wrapper around fs.watch for Node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912110
Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||t...@compton.nu
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|t...@compton.nu
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= Issues =
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
✖ 1 of 8 tests failed:
1) watchit options.ignored should monitor several children:
Error: Unexpected directory event: change
at FSWatcher.anonymous
(/home/tom/rpm/BUILD/package/lib/watchit.js:156:17)
at FSWatcher.EventEmitter.emit (events.js:98:17)
at FSEvent.FSWatcher._handle.onchange (fs.js:1039:12)
= 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 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 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 complies to the 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 consistently uses macro is (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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 5 files.
[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]: 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 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
[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).
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[-]: 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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original
[Bug 911180] Review Request: nodejs-expect-js - Behaviour-driven development (BDD) style assertions for Node.js and the browser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911180
Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||t...@compton.nu
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|t...@compton.nu
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= Issues =
[!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
expect.js has two functions copied from node core:
- i taken from the util module
- eql taken from the assert module
= 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.
[!]: 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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[-]: 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 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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[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]: 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
[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).
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[-]: 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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of 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
[Bug 865890] Review Request: concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru - A ConcurrentLinkedHashMap for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865890 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru-1.3.2-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru-1.3.2-1.fc19 -- 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=HrbfaWqmhMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 865890] Review Request: concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru - A ConcurrentLinkedHashMap for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865890 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=SAFBBnTUoea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 865890] Review Request: concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru - A ConcurrentLinkedHashMap for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865890 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru-1.3.2-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/concurrentlinkedhashmap-lru-1.3.2-1.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=6P5lGN389ca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 961907] Review Request: rubygem-moped - A MongoDB driver for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961907 --- Comment #4 from Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/rubygems/rubygem-moped.spec SRPM URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/rubygems/rubygem-moped-1.5.0-1.fc20.src.rpm - latest version -- updated to version 1.5.0 - %files section -- I was being lazy. I have fixed my lazyness. -- LICENSE, in main package, marked at %doc -- CHANGELOG and README.md, in doc subpackage, marked as %doc - Description -- I found a much more descriptive description. - %check section -- I downloaded, installed, and configured the check, but when I ran it I got the following. - Moped runs specs for authentication and replica sets against MongoHQ. If you want to run these specs and need the credentials, contact durran at gmail dot com. - and it then proceeded to fail the tests. -- Although checks are very good, if they are not written for a rpm and koji enviroment, they don't do us much good. I'm pretty sure that durran does not want the credentials public, which they would be if we included them in the rpm. -- Checks are strongly encouraged, but not required. Since this check was not designed for an rpm enviroment, I removed it. - Check against ruby 2.0 -- This is working fine in Fedora 19 and 20, both of which are using Ruby 2.0 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5435348 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5435353 -- We have also tested these rpm's with OpenShift Origin, running on Fedora 19 (running ruby 2.0) and it is working correctly. -- 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=kmbm9ynRfLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 909644] Review Request: python-websocket-client - WebSocket client for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=909644 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-05-28 09:18:51 --- Comment #21 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com --- All stable. -- 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=gl4J64JNjKa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821889] Review Request: sphinx-webtools - Sphinx web tools for python web frameworks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821889 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.el6 -- 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=oZcS2g50ULa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821889] Review Request: sphinx-webtools - Sphinx web tools for python web frameworks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821889 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.fc19 -- 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=DsaQauzRKja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821889] Review Request: sphinx-webtools - Sphinx web tools for python web frameworks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821889 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.fc17 -- 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=ZHiLbNHIhra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821889] Review Request: sphinx-webtools - Sphinx web tools for python web frameworks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821889 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sphinx-webtools-0.2.1-20120528.hg86a2eac02afe.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=M8ZKAxGAoOa=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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842
--- Comment #7 from Alan Pevec ape...@redhat.com ---
Now build fails due to failing unittests (need to look into details):
...
==
FAIL: test_args (test_test_protocol.TestExecTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
/builddir/build/BUILD/python-subunit-0.0.12/python/subunit/tests/test_test_protocol.py,
line 1012, in test_args
self.assertEqual(1, result.testsRun)
AssertionError: 1 != 0
==
FAIL: test_run (test_test_protocol.TestExecTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
/builddir/build/BUILD/python-subunit-0.0.12/python/subunit/tests/test_test_protocol.py,
line 1035, in test_run
], result._events)
AssertionError: Lists differ: [('startTest', subunit.Remote... != []
First list contains 9 additional elements.
First extra element 0:
('startTest', subunit.RemotedTestCase description='old mcdonald')
Diff is 752 characters long. Set self.maxDiff to None to see it.
--
Ran 305 tests in 0.722s
FAILED (failures=2)
--
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=hOZfGY7NPYa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967945] Review Request: perl-POE-Component-Client-Ident - A component that provides non-blocking ident lookups to your sessions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967945 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||967828 -- 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=jPw383bE2Ga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967396] Review Request: rubygem-chosen-rails - Integrate Chosen JavaScript library with Rails asset pipeline
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967396 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jstri...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jstri...@redhat.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=zJGS2pQFuga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915864] Review Request: oat - Attestation Service Host Agent based on OpenAttestation SDK
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915864 --- Comment #9 from Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com --- Jimmy, The file oat-1.6.0-pregen-xsd.patch looks troubling. What creates this file? If upstream version changes, how is it recreated? Pregeneration of code should happen in the %build section, not in a patch from a tool outside of Fedora packaging. If tools are used to generate patches (rather then humans) that don't have approved Fedora licenses and have gone through the fedora packaging process, it is possible they could be in violation of our guidelines (ie not have an acceptable license, etc) or be abandoned. This would leave the future maintainer of the oats package in a serious bind. Please find a mechanism to build this at build time or convince me otherwise. jetty-osgi has been broken into separate subpackages in rawhide. I am not sure which one the package requires. This needs fixing before I can continue the review. For the list of jetty-osgi-* packages, see: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=421207 I attempted a koji build after taking out jetty-osgi as a dep and got an error: [sdake@bigiron SRPMS]$ koji build --scratch rawhide oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm Uploading srpm: oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm [] 100% 00:02:50 5.23 MiB 31.34 KiB/sec Created task: 5435684 Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5435684 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... 5435684 build (rawhide, oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm): free 5435684 build (rawhide, oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm): free - open (arm02-builder09.arm.fedoraproject.org) 5435687 buildArch (oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm, i686): open (buildvm-20.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 5435686 buildArch (oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm, x86_64): open (buildvm-21.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 5435686 buildArch (oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm, x86_64): open (buildvm-21.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - FAILED: BuildError: error building package (arch x86_64), mock exited with status 1; see build.log for more information 0 free 2 open 0 done 1 failed 5435687 buildArch (oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm, i686): open (buildvm-20.phx2.fedoraproject.org) - FAILED: BuildError: error building package (arch i686), mock exited with status 1; see build.log for more information 0 free 1 open 0 done 2 failed 5435684 build (rawhide, oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm): open (arm02-builder09.arm.fedoraproject.org) - FAILED: BuildError: error building package (arch x86_64), mock exited with status 1; see build.log for more information 0 free 0 open 0 done 3 failed 5435684 build (rawhide, oat-1.6.0-2.fc18.src.rpm) failed [sdake@bigiron SRPMS]$ Please make sure you can build the package in koji against rawhide. The error is shown in the build log: [javac] Creating empty /builddir/build/BUILD/OpenAttestation-1.6.0/Source/HisWebServices/WEB-INF/classes/gov/niarl/sal/webservices/hisWebService/server/domain/package-info.class [jar] Building jar: /builddir/build/BUILD/OpenAttestation-1.6.0/Source/HisWebServices/HisWebServices.war BUILD FAILED /builddir/build/BUILD/OpenAttestation-1.6.0/Source/HisWebServices/build.xml:59: Problem creating jar: /builddir/build/BUILD/OpenAttestation-1.6.0/Source/HisWebServices/WEB-INF/lib/jaas.jar (No such file or directory) Total time: 2 seconds RPM build errors: error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.vgbq35 (%build) Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.vgbq35 (%build) This looks to me like perhaps you have some old files in your build environment that are allowing the build to work for you locally, but not koji remotely. Not certain on this point. Until these problems are solved, I won't be able to provide a review since I can't build the package. Also: [sdake@bigiron srpm]$ rpmlint oat*rpm oat.src: W: non-standard-group Cloud Infrastructure 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. BLOCKER: Note this should be the Applications/System like other cloud related technologies. For more about using koji see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_the_Koji_build_system -- 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=N0SzQGain9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967816] New: Review Request: maven-hpi-plugin - Maven plugin to build Jenkins plugins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967816 Bug ID: 967816 Summary: Review Request: maven-hpi-plugin - Maven plugin to build Jenkins plugins Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/maven-hpi-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/maven-hpi-plugin-1.95-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: This package contains Apache Maven plugin for developing plugins for Jenkins. Fedora Account System Username: msrb -- 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=01SsI0jNmWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 912681] Review Request: canl-java - EMI Common Authentication library - bindings for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912681
--- Comment #2 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Maven packages should use new style packaging
Note: If possible update your package to latest guidelines
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Apache_Maven
I guess that would be OK if it is packaged for Fedora 18 too?
- Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It is
pulled in by maven-local
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java
- Upstream quickly managed to create new release, version 1.2.1 fixes one
important bug.
- According to upstream the dependency on bouncycastle is =1.46 (not = 1.46).
Bouncycastle bouncy API. :-)
Questions/discussion:
=
- If the package provides a single JAR and the filename provided by the build
is neither %{name}-%{version}.jar nor %{name}.jar then this file MUST be
installed as %{name}.jar and a symbolic link with the usual name must be
provided. Alternatively, the file can be installed to the subdirectory
%{_javadir}/%{name}/ under its usual name.
But I'm not sure if we need to be strict, the '-java' in the %{name} is only a
language suffix...
- Java Guidelines prefer to use %pom_* macros for patching pom.xml files:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Patching_Maven_pom.xml_files, but
it is not needed.
- %check section is missing, but I guess that's the way with maven (maven does
the checking already during build and for example Fedora 19 macro %mvn_check is
empty)
= 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 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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in canl-java-
javadoc
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
See questions above.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Apache (v2.0), MIT/X11 (BSD like), Unknown or generated, *No
copyright* Apache (v2.0). 152 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/valtri/FEDORA/canl-java/auto-
review-f20/912681-canl-java/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 3 files.
[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 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
[Bug 913200] Review Request: python-testrepository - A repository of test results
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913200
--- Comment #3 from Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com ---
Posting the result of fedora-review tool. Manual review upcoming...
kashyap@SPECS$ cat
/home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-testrepository/review.txt
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires
= 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.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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
[ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[ ]: 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:
Unknown or generated. 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/kashyap/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-
testrepository/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[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
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Python:
[ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= 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.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI
[Bug 883413] Review Request: java-dirq - Directory based queue
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=883413 --- Comment #7 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- Hi Massimo, The new SRPM does not build on EL5 : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5432265 Probably because the SRPM has been produced on a plateform EL5 and without rpmbuild-md5. Adrien -- 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=P5KbL4Zr3oa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 963292] Review Request: perl-SOOT - Use ROOT from Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963292 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-SOOT Short Description: Use ROOT from Perl 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=4O84pdhGqqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967816] Review Request: maven-hpi-plugin - Maven plugin to build Jenkins plugins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967816 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) -- 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=H2y922ylcQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 854670] Review Request: libjpeg-turbo - A MMX/SSE2 accelerated library for manipulating JPEG image files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=854670 --- Comment #16 from Gary Gatling gsgat...@ncsu.edu --- I'm sorry. We couldn't use the whole libjpeg-turbo package because it obsoletes the core/system libjpeg. Should I submit a new review request? in fedora, turbojpeg is a subpackage of libjpeg-turbo but I gather in EPEL to follow the guidelines it must be a stand alone package. (I did not know this when the review request was submitted which is why the names differ...) Sorry for the trouble this has caused. -- 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=C2Va3ROWeJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771314] Review Request: rubygem-parslet - Parser construction library with great error reporting in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771314 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jstri...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- This won't work in F19, please update it according to the latest packaging guidelines[1]. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby -- 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=tRvsve49XJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967333] Review Request: rubygem-code_analyzer - Helps build custom code analyzer tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967333 --- Comment #3 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- * mark LICENSE as %doc * move README.md to the -doc sub-package - it's not needed at runtime * move Gemfile and Rakefile to -doc sub-package rather than excluding them * fix Summary Helps build custom code analyzer tools sounds a bit better to me. But please put the summary as a short description here in Bugzilla next time so it's the same as in spec. * fix Description (missing which IS) - e.g.: The code analyzer tool which is extracted from rails_best_practices helps you easily build your own tool for code analysis. Otherwise, it builds and runs just fine. Please fix the spec file so I can approve. -- 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=TMFEJSz1zAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962029] Review Request: libdbusmenu - A library that pulling out some code out of indicator-applet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962029
--- Comment #6 from Wolfgang Ulbrich chat-to...@raveit.de ---
(In reply to Eduardo Echeverria from comment #5)
GPL (v2 or later)
-
/var/lib/mock/fedora-19-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/libdbusmenu-12.10.2/
libdbusmenu-12.10.2/ltmain.sh
/var/lib/mock/fedora-19-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/libdbusmenu-12.10.2/
libdbusmenu-gtk3-12.10.2/ltmain.sh
This files (ltmain.sh) are part of Gnu Libtool, them have an exception,
i quote
As a special exception to the GNU General Public License,
if you distribute this file as part of a program or library that
is built using GNU Libtool, you may include this file under the
same distribution terms that you use for the rest of that program.
therefore the application is not GPLv2+
Ok, i agree.
2.
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
%dir %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0/
Your package owns the whole folder in -main, -gtk2 and -gtk3 package. But it
is already owned by gobject-introspection. Please remove those lines.
Fixed in 2
You forget to do this for the -gtk2 subpackage, anyway you can do this before
uploading to git.
3.
Pls add Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} to -doc subpackage,
otherwise it's possible to install the doc package without the main package.
Don't use the the isa tag here, this will cause an install error.
It is usually not desirable for documentation packages to depend on the main
packages, because users may want to install the docs before they decide
whether they want to install the package.
Ok, i agree, results comming 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=d4ED3qGyGYa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967807] New: Review Request: stapler - Stapler Java web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967807 Bug ID: 967807 Summary: Review Request: stapler - Stapler Java web framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/stapler.spec SRPM URL: http://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/stapler-1.209-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Stapler is a library that staples your application objects to URLs, making it easier to write web applications. The core idea of Stapler is to automatically assign URLs for your objects, creating an intuitive URL hierarchy. Fedora Account System Username: msrb -- 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=kI40XWuwZBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910233] Review Request: geoip-geolite - Free IP geolocation databases
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910233 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-05-28 09:20:12 --- Comment #17 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com --- All stable. -- 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=2fTk6nAPOJa=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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908842 Pádraig Brady pbr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(pbr...@redhat.com | |) | --- Comment #6 from Pádraig Brady pbr...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pbrady/grizzly-test-rpms/python-subunit.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pbrady/grizzly-test-rpms/python-subunit-0.0.12-2.fc18.src.rpm Description: A streaming protocol for test result Fedora Account System Username: pbrady -- 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=8SAdQ5F9f0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 910235] Review Request: python-pygeoip - Pure Python GeoIP API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910235 Bug 910235 depends on bug 910233, which changed state. Bug 910233 Summary: Review Request: geoip-geolite - Free IP geolocation databases https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910233 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- 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=sHJO6BpP7ja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 966865] Review Request: perl-Storable - Persistence for Perl data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966865 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- I bet I found them and stored into my memory, but I forgot to write them into the spec file. Maybe it's time to pass the packaging to someone with younger neurons. Nevertheless, corrected package shall be found at the same URL. -- 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=iJSC9D0Lwwa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 964161] Review Request: libpng15 - backwards compatibility for libpng
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964161 --- Comment #6 from Petr Hracek phra...@redhat.com --- Well, hopefully this is final version. Spec and SRPM URLs are the same. $ rpmlint /home/phracek/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libpng15-1.5.13-3.fc18.src.rpm libpng15.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libpng - sibling libpng15.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpng - sibling 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpm -qpl /home/phracek/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libpng15-1.5.13-3.fc18.x86_64.rpm /usr/lib64/libpng15.so.15 /usr/lib64/libpng15.so.15.13.0 /usr/share/doc/libpng15-1.5.13 /usr/share/doc/libpng15-1.5.13/LICENSE $ -- 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=Kdlr34K0g9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 966865] Review Request: perl-Storable - Persistence for Perl data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966865 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #2) I bet I found them and stored into my memory, but I forgot to write them into the spec file. Maybe it's time to pass the packaging to someone with younger neurons. And I thought you were doing that on purpose so the reviews wouldn't be that empty... ;) --- a/perl-Storable.spec +++ b/perl-Storable.spec @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ BuildRequires: perl(integer) BuildRequires: perl(overload) BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) BuildRequires: perl(threads) +BuildRequires: perl(Safe) BuildRequires: perl(Scalar::Util) BuildRequires: perl(strict) # Optional tests: @@ -33,6 +34,7 @@ BuildRequires: perl(strict) BuildRequires: perl(B::Deparse) = 0.61 BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec) = 0.8 BuildRequires: perl(Hash::Util) +BuildRequires: perl(Tie::Hash) # MD5 is deprecated and not packaged, do not require it Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `perl -V:version`; echo $version)) # Carp substitutes missing Log::Agent Approving. -- 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=CXHYxHQZW3a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967807] Review Request: stapler - Stapler Java web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967807 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) -- 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=wd0xZzEWcia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 917138] Review Request: nodejs-supervisor - supervisor program for running nodejs programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=917138 --- Comment #2 from Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/nodejs/nodejs-supervisor.spec SRPM URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/nodejs/nodejs-supervisor-0.5.2-2.fc18.src.rpm - Summary -- Capitalized first letter - Description -- Fixed spelling - LICENSE -- Include Upstreams new License file -- Added comments with URL and notice that the next update should have the file in it. - Man pages -- Luckily there is a -h option that gives the right format to work with txt2man -- Man pages created -- 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=LqBFf3lLT2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 959509] Review Request: trac10 - Enhanced wiki and issue tracking system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959509 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Excellent, 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=3xWzwu5cusa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967659] Review Request: robojournal - cross-platform journal/diary tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967659 Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||echevemas...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- Hi Will See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Contributor Please put in the Blocks field, the tag FE-NEEDSPONSOR -- 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=Y6oYWcOCWLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745515] Review Request: yuicompressor - Tool that supports the compression of both JavaScript and CSS files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745515 --- Comment #21 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- hi yes new release is out but use again rhino 1.7R2... in fedora rawhide there is 1.7R4 also in F19 (in F18 1.7R3) problems with sync moz and yiu... regards -- 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=UoIZFW2ebMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967568] Review Request: mintmenu - Advanced Menu for the MATE Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967568 --- Comment #4 from Wolfgang Ulbrich chat-to...@raveit.de --- my last open issue report for mintmenu. https://github.com/linuxmint/mintmenu/issues/36 -- 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=Pd3sIbDApta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957927] Review Request: nodejs-pedding - Just pedding for callback
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957927 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3CJtd02p8Xa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867287] Review Request: glite-jobid-api-cpp - C++ API handling gLite jobid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867287 Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se --- Package Approved. -- 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=8oJsiZtuqia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 966156] Review Request: prwd - A tool can print reduced working directory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966156 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: prwd Short Description: A tool can print reduced working directory Owners: cicku Branches: f18 f19 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=ZvGRHW4Ivpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967338] Review Request: rubygem-font-awesome-sass-rails - Font Awesome in SASS for Rails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967338 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jstri...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Hi Anuj, please take a look at the sources[1] as they contain fonts, which are in general not so straightforward to package. Have a look on how the shipment of fonts should be done in Fedora[2], also considering legal issues[3, 4]. It would be good to check whether we have those fonts packaged or not, consider linking them or packaging them separately accordingly. [1] https://github.com/littlebtc/font-awesome-sass-rails/tree/master/app/assets/fonts [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29 [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal_considerations_for_fonts [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy -- 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=3VPIseOtnua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 961901] Review Request: rubygem-origin - Simple DSL for MongoDB query generation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961901 --- Comment #4 from Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/rubygems/rubygem-origin.spec SRPM URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/rubygems/rubygem-origin-1.1.0-2.fc20.src.rpm - %check section -- Done -- Thank you for the testing URL. I am not used to doing the spec for a test and totally missed that. - %files section -- I was being lazy. I have fixed my lazyness. -- LICENSE, in main package, marked at %doc -- CHANGELOG and README.md, in doc subpackage, marked as %doc -- Rakefile, in doc subpackage, not marked as %doc -- 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=1aV6AJ5Glpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 924377] Review Request: mate-user-share - Mate user file sharing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924377 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|mate-user-share-1.6.0-3.fc1 |mate-user-share-1.6.0-3.fc1 |9 |7 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mate-user-share-1.6.0-3.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6M8KTFp4nga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957930] Review Request: nodejs-agentkeepalive - Missing keepalive http.Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957930 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=S6hOQwwJPQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956201] Review Request: nifti2dicom - Converts 3D medical images to DICOM 2D series
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956201 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package nifti2dicom-0.4.5-4.fc18: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing nifti2dicom-0.4.5-4.fc18' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-9491/nifti2dicom-0.4.5-4.fc18 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- 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=n6CWddMsCUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 963339] Review Request: libyui-bindings - Language bindings for libyui
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963339 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||libyui-bindings-1.0.1-2.fc1 ||8 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- libyui-bindings-1.0.1-2.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=tn1118mSWpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 963213] Review Request: perl-HTTP-CookieJar - Minimalist HTTP user agent cookie jar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963213 Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2013-05-28 02:24:40 --- Comment #6 from Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com --- Deps in stable. Builds done. Updates submitted. 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=dqrYwdvfqda=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957927] Review Request: nodejs-pedding - Just pedding for callback
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957927 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Tqh3lyQXWWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962029] Review Request: libdbusmenu - A library that pulling out some code out of indicator-applet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962029
--- Comment #7 from Wolfgang Ulbrich chat-to...@raveit.de ---
APPROVED !
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
libdbusmenu-jsonloader , libdbusmenu-doc
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
GPL (v3), GPL (v2 or later), Unknown or generated. 92 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/rave/962029-libdbusmenu/licensecheck.txt
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 102400 bytes in 7 files.
[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]: 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 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
[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).
= 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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: 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]:
