[Bug 964072] Review Request: ghc-text - An efficient packed Unicode text type
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964072 Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_DEV |MODIFIED Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com --- The F17 - F18 upgrade was probably incomplete. The koji builds look clean though. 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=cZ336gssjba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970009] Review Request: stoken - Token code generator compatible with RSA SecurID 128-bit (AES) token
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970009 --- Comment #12 from Kevin Cernekee cerne...@gmail.com --- I installed the FC19 beta tonight and made some additional progress: stoken only really needs a tiny piece of libtomcrypt, so I copied the necessary libtomcrypt files right into the stoken tree. autoconf will still look for a shared version (since presumably it will get bugfixes and updates) but lacking that, it will use the local copy. Users who do have libtomcrypt installed can bypass it using configure --without-libtomcrypt. Incorporating the ~5 files from libtomcrypt allowed us to drop the GnuTLS dependency and the various concurrency / initialization problems that arose. If all of this works OK, and doesn't completely break the Debian builds, I'll make it a formal v0.3 release. Unfortunately I still wasn't able to get rpmbuild to stop complaining about the /usr/lib64 rpath, even after running autogen.sh on a much newer Linux installation than usual. So the autoreconf line remains in the spec file. My latest SRPM: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/169702767/stoken/stoken-0.3-1.fc19.src.rpm Feature branch: https://github.com/cernekee/stoken/commits/fedora-v1 -- 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=D2aXGRpQEta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840551] Review Request: sugar-kuku - arithmetic education game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840551 --- Comment #42 from Danishka Navin danis...@gmail.com --- Parag, Do I need to add python2-devel here? Btw, there is no update in the upstream since I packaged this. I hope there is no issue with this package. :) -- 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=Un5qKnyT0za=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 827723] Review Request: gnuhealth - The free Health and Hospital Information System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=827723 --- Comment #8 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com --- Ping! -- 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=Be161PRDMBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969700] Review Request: libccp4 - Library providing specific CCP4 functionality
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969700
--- Comment #2 from Tim Fenn tim.f...@gmail.com ---
Thanks for the tips, comments and quick response, Mario!
(In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #1)
Spelling errors to be addressed:
subcomponents → sub components
centred → centered
Done.
If you set an Obsoletes tag, you should also use a Provides tag for the
same package, to get a proper upgrade path. Because of that we recognize
your package as the successor of all gpp4 versions, explicite versioning is
unneeded.
Done - edited spec contains:
Provides: libgpp4 = %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: libgpp4 %{version}-%{release}
seem OK?
The exit() call is not up to you to fix, but should be filed as an upstream
bug.
OK - will do.
Some parts of the spec file are obsolete for Fedora and EPEL =5:
* The initial cleaning of %{buildroot} in %install
* The %clean section
* The %defattr line in %files
cleaned up.
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
has to be
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
Fixed.
To require pkgconfig for the -devel package is unneeded, see what rpm adds
automatically:
removed.
Your package is LGPL licensed. This is OK so far, but you have to ship
COPYING.LESSER instead of COPYING (which addresses the GPLv3). The latter
doesn't affect any file in the tarball and can be ignored:
Ah, thanks - done!
updated files:
Spec URL: https://sites.google.com/site/timfenn/libccp4.spec
SRPM URL: https://sites.google.com/site/timfenn/libccp4-6.3.1-2.fc17.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=EM1Pnt63mra=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 916553] Review Request: ghc-setenv - Cross-platform library for setting environment variables
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=916553 Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||shakthim...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|shakthim...@gmail.com 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=OclxQcnD2xa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 919851] Review Request: ghc-IfElse - Anaphoric and miscellaneous useful control-flow
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919851 Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||shakthim...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|shakthim...@gmail.com 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=Wl0d4kxmf4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 920174] Review Request: ghc-geniplate - Use template Haskell to generate Uniplate-like functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=920174 Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||shakthim...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|shakthim...@gmail.com 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=P1aNzGKziba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 925987] Review Request: ghc-crypto-api - A generic interface for cryptographic operations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=925987 Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||shakthim...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|shakthim...@gmail.com 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=r8MtvAdBlia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840551] Review Request: sugar-kuku - arithmetic education game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840551 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Zl6gXsBu1Ya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840551] Review Request: sugar-kuku - arithmetic education game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840551 --- Comment #43 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Got the request from Danishka again for this review as he has been sponsored now. So, someone will be there for taking care of his work from Sugar group. Danishka, Yes. Check if upstream is providing python2 or python3 files and then accordingly add versioned Buildrequires. Like for this package python2-devel. And remove BuildRequires: python. Please provide again SPEC and SRPM for final look on this package. -- 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=jZuVOzuXmqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970009] Review Request: stoken - Token code generator compatible with RSA SecurID 128-bit (AES) token
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970009 --- Comment #13 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Kevin Cernekee from comment #12) stoken only really needs a tiny piece of libtomcrypt, so I copied the necessary libtomcrypt files right into the stoken tree. autoconf will still look for a shared version (since presumably it will get bugfixes and updates) but lacking that, it will use the local copy. Users who do have libtomcrypt installed can bypass it using configure --without-libtomcrypt. Incorporating the ~5 files from libtomcrypt allowed us to drop the GnuTLS dependency and the various concurrency / initialization problems that arose. Unfortunately, the packaging guidelines forbid the inclusion of bundled libraries in the code; so at least in the Fedora case we have to use the libtomcrypt packages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries Spec URL: http://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/stoken.spec SRPM URL: http://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/stoken-0.3-2.fc19.src.rpm - Re-enabled libtomcrypt system library Thanks, --Simone -- 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=s3e0PXZaiUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 840437] Review Request: sugar-xoeditor - editor for xo icon colors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840437 --- Comment #12 from Danishka Navin danis...@gmail.com --- thanks Kalpa Updated to version 11 SPEC file URL: http://snavin.fedorapeople.org/packages/sugar-xoeditor/sugar-xoeditor.spec SRPM URL: http://snavin.fedorapeople.org/packages/sugar-xoeditor/sugar-xoeditor-11-1.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3EnKCnSMuDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 858818] Review Request: sugar-srilanka - Game about the geography of Sri Lanka
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858818
Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com ---
Looks good for me.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- 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
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
GPL (v3 or later), Unknown or generated. 9 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/kalpa/fedora-
review/858818-sugar-srilanka/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 40960 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]: 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: No rpmlint messages.
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:
[ ]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
Note: Package contains font files
[ ]: 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
[Bug 858818] Review Request: sugar-srilanka - Game about the geography of Sri Lanka
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858818 --- Comment #3 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com --- Danishka, can we have python2-devel in BuildRequires ? -- 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=QbgAlAhhtea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853052] Review Request: hawtdispatch - The libdispatch style API for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853052 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/hawtdispatch.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/hawtdispatch-1.17-1.fc18.src.rpm - update to 1.17 Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463780 - -- 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=sIXTsS2icDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 965570] Review Request: cbmc - Bounded Model Checker for ANSI-C and C++ programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965570 --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- Can anything be done about the rpmlint output? -- 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=b28M4AC4dYa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 965570] Review Request: cbmc - Bounded Model Checker for ANSI-C and C++ programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965570 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter...@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=8oSRE4SzgIa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 965570] Review Request: cbmc - Bounded Model Checker for ANSI-C and C++ programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965570 --- Comment #3 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com --- Which ones in the rpmlint output? -- 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=dCTT7g06rYa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 964072] Review Request: ghc-text - An efficient packed Unicode text type
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964072 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- Thanks again for the review. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-text Short Description: Efficient packed Unicode text type Owners: petersen Branches: f19 f18 InitialCC: haskell-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=davr1wQz6Va=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970130] Review Request: git-extras - Little git extras
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970130 --- Comment #1 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- koji-build logs: rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463899 F19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463901 -- 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=7ozOS7aP74a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970009] Review Request: stoken - Token code generator compatible with RSA SecurID 128-bit (AES) token
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970009 --- Comment #14 from David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org --- If run on a machine with the Intel AES-NI instructions, does this make use of them? I'd like to make sure it does. Give me a SSH public key and a preferred username if you need an account on a suitable machine. -- 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=8C20wuzDjHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969387] Review Request: freetiger - Free implementation of the tiger hash algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969387 --- Comment #6 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- koji-build logs: rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463919 F19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463922 F18: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463925 F17: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463928 el6: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463932 el5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463939 -- 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=HTsXbSSha7a=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 Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-subunit Short Description: Python implementation of subunit test streaming protocol Owners: pbrady mrunge Branches: f18 f19 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=dzAYCMTZKAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970515] New: Review Request: hawtdb - A Powerful Key/Value Store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970515 Bug ID: 970515 Summary: Review Request: hawtdb - A Powerful Key/Value Store Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: punto...@libero.it QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/hawtdb.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/hawtdb-1.6-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: HawtDB is an embedded MVCC Key/Value Database. Fedora Account System Username: gil Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5463971 -- 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=FRYDrLNESha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 968136] Review Request: camel - Apache Camel integration framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=968136 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||970515 -- 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=VrPsHpFr4la=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970515] Review Request: hawtdb - A Powerful Key/Value Store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970515 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||968136 -- 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=ggdf3Z21Mpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 843646] Review Request: sugar-india - Game about the geography of India
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=843646 Danishka Navin danis...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #4 from Danishka Navin danis...@gmail.com --- Michael, Shall I proceed this bug? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZOWdfBzxyxa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970393] Review Request: foo2zjs - Driver for printers of various wire protocols
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970393 David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dw...@infradead.org --- Comment #2 from David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org --- There's a bunch of rpmlint warnings about this. Sorry, I feel like such a hypocrite when pointing this out, since you started with a package I created myself :) The spelling-error warnings are all OK, I think, and the invalid-url is also fine given the way that upstream does (or *doesn't* do, more to the point) release management. But the incorrect-fsf-address should probably be fixed (not sure of packaging guidelines there; at least in the files that get shipped lik foo2zjs-wrapper), and manual-page-warning usually does actually mean that the man page is being misrendered. I think the dangerous-command-in-%post is probably fine too, as long as that's what other similar packages in Fedora are doing. -- 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=wuuMXfFbpFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970137] Review Request: log4j-jboss-logmanager - JBoss Log4j Emulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970137 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com --- Thanks for review! The failure is because you haven't build it on Rawhide and this package will be pushed only for Rawhide. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: log4j-jboss-logmanager Short Description: JBoss Log4j Emulation Owners: goldmann -- 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=N22FaeFfgha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970556] New: Review Request: maven-stapler-plugin - Maven plugin for Stapler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970556 Bug ID: 970556 Summary: Review Request: maven-stapler-plugin - Maven plugin for Stapler 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-stapler-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/maven-stapler-plugin-1.16-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: This package contains Apache Maven plugin for Stapler Web Framework. 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=sQD64MeRNIa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970556] Review Request: maven-stapler-plugin - Maven plugin for Stapler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970556 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=JfbPOlxAT9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 961404] Review Request: mingw-gtkspellmm30 - MinGW Windows GtkSpellmm library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961404 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=P8F9sh5Eoca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 961404] Review Request: mingw-gtkspellmm30 - MinGW Windows GtkSpellmm library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961404 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-gtkspellmm30-3.0.2-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw-gtkspellmm30-3.0.2-1.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=gh4JVkXClFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 961404] Review Request: mingw-gtkspellmm30 - MinGW Windows GtkSpellmm library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961404 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-gtkspellmm30-3.0.2-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw-gtkspellmm30-3.0.2-1.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=PddTktRawka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969877] Review Request: rubygem-timers - Pure Ruby one-shot and periodic timers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969877 --- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Axilleas Pipinellis from comment #4) New Spec: http://axilleas.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/rubygem-timers/rubygem-timers.spec New SRPM: http://axilleas.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/rubygem-timers/rubygem-timers-1.1.0-2. fc19.src.rpm Thanks, looks good now. By informal review you mean what exactly? Just find a package that needs review and express my thoughts at the bugzilla? Yes, exactly. Other possibility might be to submit more packages for a review and once I review them, I'll sponsor you. -- 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=SYesJxOTlHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970556] Review Request: maven-stapler-plugin - Maven plugin for Stapler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970556 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- would like to take this 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=1hJjX6B3tia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970556] Review Request: maven-stapler-plugin - Maven plugin for Stapler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970556 --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- hi, build fails: [WARNING] The POM for net.sf.ezmorph:ezmorph:jar:1.0.6 is missing, no dependency information available [INFO] [INFO] [INFO] Skipping Maven Stapler plugin [INFO] This project has been banned from the build due to previous failures. [INFO] [INFO] [INFO] BUILD FAILURE [INFO] [INFO] Total time: 2.218s [INFO] Finished at: Tue Jun 04 13:03:43 CEST 2013 [INFO] Final Memory: 16M/142M [INFO] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project maven-stapler-plugin: Could not resolve dependencies for project org.kohsuke.stapler:maven-stapler-plugin:maven-plugin:1.16: The repository system is offline but the artifact net.sf.ezmorph:ezmorph:jar:1.0.6 is not available in the local repository. - [Help 1] [ERROR] can you add this one as BR? thanks 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=txoOJSyM0Ya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970576] New: Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970576 Bug ID: 970576 Summary: Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: punto...@libero.it QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/hsqldb1.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/hsqldb1-1.8.1.3-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: HSQLdb is a relational database engine written in JavaTM , with a JDBC driver, supporting a subset of ANSI-92 SQL. It offers a small (about 100k), fast database engine which offers both in memory and disk based tables. Embedded and server modes are available. Additionally, it includes tools such as a minimal web server, in-memory query and management tools (can be run as applets or servlets, too) and a number of demonstration examples. Downloaded code should be regarded as being of production quality. The product is currently being used as a database and persistence engine in many Open Source Software projects and even in commercial projects and products! In it's current version it is extremely stable and reliable. It is best known for its small size, ability to execute completely in memory and its speed. Yet it is a completely functional relational database management system that is completely free under the Modified BSD License. Yes, that's right, completely free of cost or restrictions! Fedora Account System Username: gil rebuilt as backward compatibility package see: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=706176 -- 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=sboWqyETtZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969877] Review Request: rubygem-timers - Pure Ruby one-shot and periodic timers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969877 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Axilleas Pipinellis from comment #4) However, prior I sponsor you and since this is trivial package, could you please take look on some other packages and do some informal review of them? You can finish their review later, once officially sponsored. Thanks. By informal review you mean what exactly? Just find a package that needs review and express my thoughts at the bugzilla? I think Vit's intention is you should follow the process as described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Reviewing_packages So you just pick two or three random review-bugs (how-to find them is described in link above) which are not assigned yet (and preferably do not block FE-NEEDSPONSOR), add yourself and possibly Vit to CC-list and start doing a `regular` review-process WITHOUT assigning yourself to the review-bug and WITHOUT setting the fedora-review(?)-flag. You should post a link to this review-bug inside this one and your trac-ticket sponsorship-request. In your first comment you should make clear that the review you're doing is an informal one. Then you should go down the whole review-process until the pkg would usually get fedora-review(+)-flag from a fedora-packager-person. As soon as you get sponsored into the packager-group, you can assign the review-bugs, which you did informal reviews on, and approve / set fedora-review(+)-flag then. If you have any questions feel free to ask. If you want to take a guided review before starting your own informal reviews you can ask me, too. -- 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=oamu8iVtL1a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 962651] Re-Review Request: bamf - Application matching framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962651 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #7 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me --- Hi Praveen, I've fixed the other issues you pointed out, but the license situation is thornier than expected: - some files are GPLv2+ and GPLv3+, as you pointed out - all bamf-*.c files in src/ are GPLv3 *only* (without +) - some files in lib are GPLv2 or GPLv3 I *think* the v3-only code are out of the library, and everything in libbamf is either (LGPLv2+) or (LGPLv2 or LGPLv3), and either way, linking from GPL code to LGPL code should be fine anyway, but let me take a more thorough look at the files first - it's likely that the subpackages might end up with different license descriptions. An updated spec will suffice, I take it, as the requested changes only affects the packaging metadata? 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=XVAcXIc8upa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 968262] Review Request: xboxdrv - Userspace Xbox/Xbox360 Gamepad Driver for Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=968262 --- Comment #2 from Marcel Wysocki m...@satgnu.net --- * Tue Jun 04 2013 Marcel Wysocki m...@satgnu.net - 0.8.5-2 - spec cleanups - fix man page permission Spec URL: http://maci.satgnu.net/rpmbuild/SPECS/xboxdrv.spec SRPM URL: http://maci.satgnu.net/rpmbuild/SRPMS/xboxdrv-0.8.5-2.fc19.src.rpm KOJI URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5464580 -- 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=ZX6GiodpA7a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969877] Review Request: rubygem-timers - Pure Ruby one-shot and periodic timers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969877 --- Comment #7 from Axilleas Pipinellis axill...@archlinux.gr --- (In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #5) Yes, exactly. Other possibility might be to submit more packages for a review and once I review them, I'll sponsor you. Will look into it, thanks. (In reply to Björn Esser from comment #6) I think Vit's intention is you should follow the process as described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Reviewing_packages So you just pick two or three random review-bugs (how-to find them is described in link above) which are not assigned yet (and preferably do not block FE-NEEDSPONSOR), add yourself and possibly Vit to CC-list and start doing a `regular` review-process WITHOUT assigning yourself to the review-bug and WITHOUT setting the fedora-review(?)-flag. You should post a link to this review-bug inside this one and your trac-ticket sponsorship-request. In your first comment you should make clear that the review you're doing is an informal one. Then you should go down the whole review-process until the pkg would usually get fedora-review(+)-flag from a fedora-packager-person. As soon as you get sponsored into the packager-group, you can assign the review-bugs, which you did informal reviews on, and approve / set fedora-review(+)-flag then. If you have any questions feel free to ask. If you want to take a guided review before starting your own informal reviews you can ask me, too. Cool, thanks for the info :) About the trac-ticket sponsorship-request, should I fill a ticket too? I didn't see that anywhere in the wiki... Can I ping you in irc? Better not pollute BZ. -- 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=lxPIiiGV7qa=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 #11 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Thanks, much appreciated. But before I do that, can I have you go into a bit more detail about what you reviewed? It's a bit sparse. -- 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=IUzMdOIGdba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969877] Review Request: rubygem-timers - Pure Ruby one-shot and periodic timers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969877 --- Comment #8 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Axilleas Pipinellis from comment #7) About the trac-ticket sponsorship-request, should I fill a ticket too? I didn't see that anywhere in the wiki... No, you don't have to. -- 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=snFQNp6P7Ga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970515] Review Request: hawtdb - A Powerful Key/Value Store
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970515 Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dougsl...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dougsl...@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=7ahlP29nvGa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867959] Review Request: libgit2 - C library for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867959 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=VyiUd7G54ua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867959] Review Request: libgit2 - C library for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867959 --- Comment #18 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=mu3EG8TFTYa=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 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=2KCHEMU9Oya=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 #27 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=CvMsYVlnnfa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957918] Review Request: libxmp - A multi-format module playback library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957918 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=FVQ5RXbmhua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853052] Review Request: hawtdispatch - The libdispatch style API for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853052 Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dougsl...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dougsl...@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=I5qF6htjf2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957918] Review Request: libxmp - A multi-format module playback library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957918 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- No description provided, please correct. -- 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=nUsidcTkmSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967401] Review Request: vmtouch - Portable file system cache diagnostics and control
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967401 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=8jc1Cztps0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967401] Review Request: vmtouch - Portable file system cache diagnostics and control
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967401 --- 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=IFCKJ7fGoTa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967620] Review Request: edelib - Small and portable C++ library for EDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967620 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=lRmMBAmgnaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967620] Review Request: edelib - Small and portable C++ library for EDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967620 --- 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=ntrRyO8L3sa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970035] Review Request: libnm-qt - Qt-only wrapper for NetworkManager DBus API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970035 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=qAhUgUaTUsa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970035] Review Request: libnm-qt - Qt-only wrapper for NetworkManager DBus API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970035 --- Comment #6 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=p3f6oZw14ya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970137] Review Request: log4j-jboss-logmanager - JBoss Log4j Emulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970137 --- 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=okOcDmLrqza=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970137] Review Request: log4j-jboss-logmanager - JBoss Log4j Emulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970137 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=xb5W6JfTTAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853055] Review Request: mqtt-client - A Java MQTT Client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853055 --- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/mqtt-client.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/mqtt-client-1.5-1.fc18.src.rpm - update to 1.5 -- 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=CQYtRlKqWAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 964072] Review Request: ghc-text - An efficient packed Unicode text type
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964072 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Already exists, please submit Package Change for f18 branch. -- 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=5jFpe0xYmOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 964072] Review Request: ghc-text - An efficient packed Unicode text type
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964072 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=gKrT41yBIXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 841239] Review Request: sugar-story - an activity that uses images to prompt the learner to tell stories
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=841239
--- Comment #4 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com ---
Can we have python2-devel for BuildRequires
Double entry of CREDIT in %doc, add COPYING there
License is GPLv3
Pay attention to Rpmlint output below
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires
- 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.
Note: Cannot find COPYING in rpm(s)
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
= 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
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
MIT/X11 (BSD like), GPL (v3 or later), Unknown or generated. 1
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/kalpa/fedora-review/841239-sugar-story/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[ ]: 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 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).
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.
[Bug 970009] Review Request: stoken - Token code generator compatible with RSA SecurID 128-bit (AES) token
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970009
--- Comment #15 from David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org ---
Hm, you don't *really* need to update libtomcrypt; you could just configure
with TOMCRYPT_CFLAGS=-I%{_includedir}/tomcrypt.
Well, that *was* true with the 0.2 tarball. Now it seems to define
LOCAL_TOMCRYPT if there's no pkg-config package, and it doesn't fall back to
using the system libtomcrypt unless there's a corresponding .pc file.
--
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=tXjiitnK3ja=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970009] Review Request: stoken - Token code generator compatible with RSA SecurID 128-bit (AES) token
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970009
--- Comment #16 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to David Woodhouse from comment #15)
Hm, you don't *really* need to update libtomcrypt; you could just configure
with TOMCRYPT_CFLAGS=-I%{_includedir}/tomcrypt.
Well, that *was* true with the 0.2 tarball. Now it seems to define
LOCAL_TOMCRYPT if there's no pkg-config package, and it doesn't fall back to
using the system libtomcrypt unless there's a corresponding .pc file.
Yep. So it still needs the update. Actually I preferred the GnuTLS patch,
including the 5 files from libtomcrypt makes things more complicated when
packaging.
--
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=nuJXYCNpyLa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969877] Review Request: rubygem-timers - Pure Ruby one-shot and periodic timers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969877 --- Comment #9 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Axilleas Pipinellis from comment #7) Cool, thanks for the info :) You're welcome. Can I ping you in irc? Better not pollute BZ. You can contact via email. I don't hang around on irc, yet. Will have to create an account... -- 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=hhzUpgz14Na=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 841239] Review Request: sugar-story - an activity that uses images to prompt the learner to tell stories
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=841239 --- Comment #5 from Kalpa Welivitigoda callka...@gmail.com --- rm po/nah.po in %prep will solve the /usr/share/locale/nah/LC_MESSAGES/org.sugarlabs.StoryActivity.mo issue -- 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=wBqQfC2v3Ia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853055] Review Request: mqtt-client - A Java MQTT Client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853055 Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dougsl...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dougsl...@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=yqIMb238Oqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970137] Review Request: log4j-jboss-logmanager - JBoss Log4j Emulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970137 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2013-06-04 08:55:27 -- 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=IXuvNvrl6Qa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967334] Review Request: rubygem-connection_pool - Generic connection pool for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967334 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||vondr...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- I taking this 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=mwRujumfPva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 961912] Review Request: rubygem-mongoid - Elegant Persistance in Ruby for MongoDB
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961912
Andy Grimm agr...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm agr...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
- See below
[x]: EXTRA Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt rpms
[-]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[-]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: MUST Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: MUST Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST No %config files under /usr.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: MUST If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD Buildroot is not present
[x]: SHOULD Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[!]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. [ 3.1.4 is out, not a blocker ]
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[-]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x]:
[Bug 961912] Review Request: rubygem-mongoid - Elegant Persistance in Ruby for MongoDB
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961912 Andy Grimm agr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|agr...@redhat.com QA Contact|agr...@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=jySKGDw2xqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970036] Review Request: kde-plasma-nm - Plasma applet written in QML for managing network connections
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970036 --- Comment #3 from Lukáš Tinkl lti...@redhat.com --- Build fails with: -- Found Gettext: built in libc CMake Error at po/CMakeLists.txt:9 (MESSAGE): Please install msgmerge binary -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred! -- 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=cd7NPr1emJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 919703] Review Request: libgap - libGAP -- a C library version of the GAP kernel
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919703 --- Comment #5 from Volker Braun vbr...@physics.upenn.edu --- Now the GAP symbol prefixing is done in the dist-hook. In particular its now easy to make tarballs available, and the current one is http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/vbraun/spkg/libgap-4.6.4.tar.gz I also changed the tests to use SYS_DEFAULT_PATHS for the GAP root directory, if available. So you shouldn't have to patch the tests any more. -- 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=rQjf4kK5uSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969992] Review Request: jastow - Jasper fork
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969992 --- Comment #3 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com --- Package is building again: Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jastow/3/jastow.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jastow/3/jastow-1.0.0-0.3.Alpha2.fc18.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5464830 -- 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=TA9qvVhedna=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970641] New: Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.1-api - Java Servlet 3.1 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970641 Bug ID: 970641 Summary: Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.1-api - Java Servlet 3.1 API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mgold...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-servlet-3.1-api/1/jboss-servlet-3.1-api.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-servlet-3.1-api/1/jboss-servlet-3.1-api-1.0.0-0.1.Alpha1.fc18.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: goldmann Description: The Java Servlet 3.1 API classes. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5464859 -- 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=n958Bt4M8ca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970641] Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.1-api - Java Servlet 3.1 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970641 Marek Goldmann mgold...@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=wSm1tUJD1Ja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 843646] Review Request: sugar-india - Game about the geography of India
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=843646 --- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org --- There is various issues around bundling to fix, so I think you need to find a fix for them first to have it approved. I am not fully sure to understand your question. -- 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=rwNpcI4Qeba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956204] Review Request: bdii-config-site - site BDII configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956204 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=eWbd8m1Gu9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956205] Review Request: bdii-config-top - top BDII configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956205 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=I8s9x6hVHXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956207] Review Request: glite-info-plugin-fcr - Freedom of Choices for Resources implementation for the BDII
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956207 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=oauOJDDMM9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956243] Review Request: glite-info-provider-service - GLUE service information provider
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956243 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=78pQJb3kz5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956210] Review Request: glite-info-provider-ldap - Information provider to query LDAP sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956210 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=LdKfajdFrka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956249] Review Request: glite-info-site - Site information provider
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956249 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=iza41wLx3aa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970036] Review Request: kde-plasma-nm - Plasma applet written in QML for managing network connections
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970036
Lukáš Tinkl lti...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Lukáš Tinkl lti...@redhat.com ---
The package passes all MUST items:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages
- update-desktop-database is invoked when required
Note: desktop file(s) in kde-plasma-nm, kde-plasma-nm-openvpn, kde-plasma-
nm-vpnc
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install if there is
such a file.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
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]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: %defattr present but not needed
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
GPL, LGPL, GPL (v2 or later), Unknown or generated. 9 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ltinkl/tmp
/plasma-nm/review-kde-plasma-nm/licensecheck.txt
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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 =
[Bug 956250] Review Request: glite-info-static - Script to create GLUE LDIF files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956250 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=gEHMrm2c48a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970651] Review Request: jboss-websocket-1.0-api - JSR-356: Java WebSocket 1.0 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970651 Marek Goldmann mgold...@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=51ycob3RUua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970651] New: Review Request: jboss-websocket-1.0-api - JSR-356: Java WebSocket 1.0 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970651 Bug ID: 970651 Summary: Review Request: jboss-websocket-1.0-api - JSR-356: Java WebSocket 1.0 API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mgold...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-websocket-1.0-api/1/jboss-websocket-1.0-api.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-websocket-1.0-api/1/jboss-websocket-1.0-api-1.0.0-0.1.Beta1.fc18.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: goldmann Description: The JSR-356: Java WebSocket 1.0 API classes. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5464909 -- 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=4oMGXuJlzXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956255] Review Request: glite-info-update-endpoints - Script to collect LDAP endpoins to populate the BDII
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956255 maria.alandes.pradi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (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=in7Hib9feWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970036] Review Request: kde-plasma-nm - Plasma applet written in QML for managing network connections
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970036 Jan Grulich jgrul...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jan Grulich jgrul...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: kde-plasma-nm Short Description: Plasma applet written in QML for managing network connections Owners: jgrulich Branches: f17 f18 f19 InitialCC: ltinkl -- 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=oNmWzZ0gEQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967334] Review Request: rubygem-connection_pool - Generic connection pool for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967334
Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
* Summary
- The summary is quite brief. Would you mind to add more details, e.g.
something from beginning of README
* pushd .%{gem_instdir}
- In the %check section, could you please replace the pushd . with more
accurate pushd .%{gem_instdir}? Although in this case, it works quite ok,
it would fails, if the gem contains binary extension, since now you are
testing the unpacked gem, instead of installed gem.
* Move README.md into -doc subpackage
- I prefer to put all files not needed for runtime into -doc subpackage.
However, this is my personal preference, so it is up to you.
* Keep Gemfile and Rakefile in -doc subpackage
- Although these files are not needed for Fedora, I prefer to keep them in
-doc subpackage as long as they are shipped by upstream. Nevertheless, this
is not blocker.
Nevertheless, the above are just minor fix so I APPROVE the package, but please
fix the issues prior import into Fedora.
--
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=eOwdKqgkWUa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 872783] Review Request: Ray - Parallel genome assemblies for parallel DNA sequencing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872783 --- Comment #32 from Sébastien Boisvert s...@boisvert.info --- (In reply to Matthias Runge from comment #31) Sebastien, is the email-Address s...@boisvert.info the same as in fas? Yes. In https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/user/view/sebhtml?_csrf_token=ABCDEFG Email: s...@boisvert.info -- 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=tsLO0A8Tuwa=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 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=eKqLePNkMta=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 #12 from Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com --- I checked licensing, RPMlint, koji builds, all check out ok, I just wanted to test it and work has been a nightmare. I can paste a fedora-review later today, but you have a proven track record. I did go through the spec, rpm, licensing and rpmlint. -- 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=mbQJ4r76U2a=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 #28 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-subunit-0.0.12-5.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-subunit-0.0.12-5.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=DNsfFMsGRya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967401] Review Request: vmtouch - Portable file system cache diagnostics and control
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967401 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=9RwfDGZFIza=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 967401] Review Request: vmtouch - Portable file system cache diagnostics and control
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967401 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- vmtouch-0.8.0-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/vmtouch-0.8.0-1.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=gZSGBOGAhra=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 #29 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-subunit-0.0.12-5.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-subunit-0.0.12-5.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=6FUZTqvGeIa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
