[Bug 979661] Review Request: perl-Net-Random - A module gets random data from online sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979661 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- NEW SOEC URL: http://cicku.me/perl-Net-Random.spec NEW SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/perl-Net-Random-2.22-2.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=K078SuTHHDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979667] Review Request: perl-Tie-Function - Wrap functions in tied hash sugar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979667 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Review: + mock build is successful for f20 + rpmlint on rpms gave 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. + Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum) srpm tarball : 0b1617af218dfab911ba0fbd72210529a246efe140332da77fe3e03d11000117 upstream tarball : 0b1617af218dfab911ba0fbd72210529a246efe140332da77fe3e03d11000117 + License GPL+ or Artistic is valid and included in source files. + rest follows packaging guidelines + make test is successful + This package perl-Tie-Function-0.02-1.fc20.noarch Provides: perl(Tie::Function) = 0.02 perl-Tie-Function = 0.02-1.fc20 Requires: perl = 0:5.006 perl(Carp) Looks good. 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=R0YXxvrY7aa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979653] Review Request: perl-Perl6-Slurp - Implemention of the Perl 6 'slurp' built-in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979653 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- I don't think you need to add perl(strict) requires. APPROVED above srpm. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hhAmloxLsDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979663] Review Request: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies - Find dependencies for modules on CPAN
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979663 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- NEW SPEC URL: http://cicku.me/perl-CPAN-FindDependencies.spec NEW SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/perl-CPAN-FindDependencies-2.42-2.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=aMGNWLIGqla=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 978731] Review Request: rpm-compare-req - tool for comparing dependencies of an RPM against a set of repositories
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=978731 --- Comment #10 from Matej Stuchlik mstuc...@redhat.com --- Fix'd. Spec URL: http://mstuchli.fedorapeople.org/rpm-compare-req.spec SRPM URL: http://mstuchli.fedorapeople.org/rpm-compare-req-0.1.0-2.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=dTKhn9Re18a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979667] Review Request: perl-Tie-Function - Wrap functions in tied hash sugar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979667 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Tie-Function Short Description: Wrap functions in tied hash sugar Owners: cicku Branches: f19 f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UNktNKV8EOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979673] Review Request: perl-File-Find-Object - Object oriented File::Find replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979673 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Thanks for the update. Now, I see rpm does not automatically extracted following Requires: perl(Class::XSAccessor) Please add this back in spec. APPROVED. Will review 979676 package later on. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ss2uL6TYyWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979661] Review Request: perl-Net-Random - A module gets random data from online sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979661 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Looks good now. 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=EsUXzkANkAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979663] Review Request: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies - Find dependencies for modules on CPAN
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979663 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Looks good now. 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=CQXo5ZgXnba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980222] Review Request: perl-Class-Accessor-Classy - Accessors with minimal inheritance
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980222
--- Comment #2 from John C Peterson j...@eskimo.com ---
Spec URL: http://www.eskimo.com/~jcp/perl-Class-Accessor-Classy.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.eskimo.com/~jcp/perl-Class-Accessor-Classy-0.9.1-2.fc17.src.rpm
Hi Petr,
Thanks for doing the review.
I think I have addressed those issues in release two above.
I was indeed going to push this back to EPEL at some point. I don't like the
look of the rm -rf %{buildroot} either, so I put those inside ?rhel
conditionals. (Heaven forbid if %{buildroot} were / !!!)
I'm perhaps a little out of touch with building for EPEL, so I wasn't sure
about an explicit Buildroot: ... definition. I had already removed the one that
cpanspec had put in there. (I was under the impression that's not needed
anymore, even for EPEL).
I'm a bit surprised that cpanspec missed all of those build dependencies. I'll
know to perform my own search of the code for missed build dependencies in the
future.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=V8XbwjUNzta=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980399] Review Request: python-ntplib - Python module that offers a simple interface to query NTP servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980399 Robert Kuska rku...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rku...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rku...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Robert Kuska rku...@redhat.com --- I'll take 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=GoTQ0wI1zpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 890771] Review Request: edje - Abstract GUI layout and animation object library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890771 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(m...@zarb.org)| --- Comment #9 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org --- Sorry for the delay - the requires are stil redundant ( ie eval-devel among others ) - /usr/share/mime is still unowned - there is no fully versioned dependency in subpackages for edje-utils - still not note for the make test - License tag is still wrong - package is likely still not installable in rawhide So NACK for the time being. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=E2xkTvGhW5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 978743] Review Request: superkb - Graphical application launcher for Linux.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=978743 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- superkb-0.22-3.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/superkb-0.22-3.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=XUuZyShbcca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 978743] Review Request: superkb - Graphical application launcher for Linux.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=978743 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- superkb-0.22-3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/superkb-0.22-3.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=yNWjZ7KAnVa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 978743] Review Request: superkb - Graphical application launcher for Linux.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=978743 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- superkb-0.22-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/superkb-0.22-3.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=eMWYCplDRsa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980222] Review Request: perl-Class-Accessor-Classy - Accessors with minimal inheritance
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980222
Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to John C Peterson from comment #2)
Spec URL: http://www.eskimo.com/~jcp/perl-Class-Accessor-Classy.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.eskimo.com/~jcp/perl-Class-Accessor-Classy-0.9.1-2.fc17.src.rpm
Hi Petr,
Thanks for doing the review.
Glad to help :)
I think I have addressed those issues in release two above.
I was indeed going to push this back to EPEL at some point. I don't like the
look of the rm -rf %{buildroot} either, so I put those inside ?rhel
conditionals. (Heaven forbid if %{buildroot} were / !!!)
The conditionals aren't necessary and I'd say they make the spec even uglier.
Also the chances of %buildroot being something terribly wrong and the user
doing the build having the permissions to do any damage there are really low.
And if that happens, it's their own fault ;)
I'm perhaps a little out of touch with building for EPEL, so I wasn't sure
about an explicit Buildroot: ... definition. I had already removed the one
that cpanspec had put in there. (I was under the impression that's not
needed anymore, even for EPEL).
You will need it for EPEL5.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging
See the other relevant sections of EPEL guidelines too. You won't need much
for EPEL6 only.
I'm a bit surprised that cpanspec missed all of those build dependencies.
I'll know to perform my own search of the code for missed build dependencies
in the future.
The stable versions of cpanspec only look into the META.* files which often
don't contain much (or correct) information. I'm currently working on a
better, PPI-based dependency detection but peeking at the code will always be
the best option.
Anyhow, the package conforms to the guidelines now. 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=g9nvGHjTT3a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 734531] Review Request: unison240 - File synchronisation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734531 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rjo...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: unison240 New Branches: el6 Owners: rjones -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=l9YtkBvqlBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980399] Review Request: python-ntplib - Python module that offers a simple interface to query NTP servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980399 --- Comment #4 from Vratislav Podzimek vpodz...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #2) $ licensecheck -r * ntplib.py: LGPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) setup.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN test_ntplib.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN The file ntplib.py is that file which we refer to as the software we want to package. Don't bother with ambiguous license files. The header in ntplib.py and PKGINFO say LGPL or later versions, so the license tag is LGPLv2+. Moreover, the CHANGELOG contains this: version 0.1.8 - 2010-02-20 - change to LGPL license - cleanup I'm changing the tag to LGPLv2+. Is it possible to run test_ntplib.py in a %check section? Would this make sense? I was thinking about it, but those tests need network connection and try to poke some NTP servers. They fail e.g. on the networks with blocked NTP traffic to external servers. rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT is an artifact from older Fedora releases. Don't know why rpmdev-newspec still adds it to a spec file. You can safely drop that line. Dropped. You have to add CHANGELOG and COPYING.LESSER to %doc. Hmm, that would mean some further changes as they are not installed by the setup.py anywhere. BTW, the incorrect FSF address in ntplib.py is worth to be reported upstream. Patch sent to the upstream maintainer. One of the description lines is too long, line 16 has 81 characters. Should be no more than 80. Fixed. 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=Q8TkBoeaIBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979661] Review Request: perl-Net-Random - A module gets random data from online sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979661 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Net-Random Short Description: A module gets random data from online sources Owners: cicku Branches: 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=JnKWXXKqYda=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979653] Review Request: perl-Perl6-Slurp - Implemention of the Perl 6 'slurp' built-in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979653 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Perl6-Slurp Short Description: Implemention of the Perl 6 'slurp' built-in Owners: cicku Branches: 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=x3QLIdr6t4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979663] Review Request: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies - Find dependencies for modules on CPAN
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979663 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies Short Description: Find dependencies for modules on CPAN Owners: cicku Branches: 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=lokh0sF5lha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979673] Review Request: perl-File-Find-Object - Object oriented File::Find replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979673 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-File-Find-Object Short Description: Object oriented File::Find replacement Owners: cicku Branches: 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=AUh1LBRD1pa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 977112] Review Request: CuraEngine - Engine for processing 3D models into G-code instructions for 3D printers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977112 Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mrcer...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mrcer...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Mario Ceresa mrcer...@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=dlmHHAGaKLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979663] Review Request: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies - Find dependencies for modules on CPAN
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979663 Christopher Meng cicku...@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=epRGCIwTQja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979653] Review Request: perl-Perl6-Slurp - Implemention of the Perl 6 'slurp' built-in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979653 Christopher Meng cicku...@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=8HmByLfHTXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979661] Review Request: perl-Net-Random - A module gets random data from online sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979661 Christopher Meng cicku...@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=HzJGIpAMMqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 829713] Review Request: grive - An open source Linux client for Google Drive
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829713 Juan Orti Alcaine juan.o...@miceliux.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||juan.o...@miceliux.com --- Comment #22 from Juan Orti Alcaine juan.o...@miceliux.com --- Hello, I'm interested in this package and have created my own spec with the latest version. Vasiliy, could you take a look at my changes? I can help you co-maintaning this package. Or, if you have dropped your interest in this package, I can submit my own review request. Here is what I've done: SPEC: http://jorti.fedorapeople.org/grive/grive.spec SRPM: http://jorti.fedorapeople.org/grive/grive-0.3.0-0.1.20130702git27817e8.fc19.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=XAcZeSHip0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979656] Review Request: perl-Set-Array - Arrays as objects with lots of handy methods
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979656 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Upstream said that the worng license is a typo, so this package can be packaged now. NEW SPEC URL: http://cicku.me/perl-Set-Array.spec NEW SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/perl-Set-Array-0.29-1.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=1fSJT1j2AVa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980071] Review Request: python-xpyb - X Python Binding, based on the X C Binding (XCB) library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980071 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Hi, please fix the problem ASAP, I'm waiting for your good news. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=BpU8FFkqtaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 829713] Review Request: grive - An open source Linux client for Google Drive
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829713 Vasiliy Glazov vasc...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(vasc...@gmail.com | |) | --- Comment #23 from Vasiliy Glazov vasc...@gmail.com --- I'm still interested in this package. And I agree be co-maintainer. I hope it will help me to become a full maintainer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VVqc4sY5w6a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979665] Review Request: perl-Data-MessagePack - MessagePack serialising/deserialising
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979665 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Review: + mock build is successful for f20 + rpmlint output on rpms gave perl-Data-MessagePack.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) serialising - serializing, serialization perl-Data-MessagePack.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) deserialising - serializing perl-Data-MessagePack.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US versa - avers, verse, verso perl-Data-MessagePack.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-MessagePack/ urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known perl-Data-MessagePack.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/G/GF/GFUJI/Data-MessagePack-0.47.tar.gz urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known perl-Data-MessagePack.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) serialising - serializing, serialization perl-Data-MessagePack.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) deserialising - serializing perl-Data-MessagePack.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US versa - avers, verse, verso perl-Data-MessagePack.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-MessagePack/ urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known perl-Data-MessagePack-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-MessagePack/ urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings. == looks clean + Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum) srpm tarball : 47225ee51263bd78324a0f2a3de800bf53344dc597cb64d58661e711bbab9ca8 upstream tarball : 47225ee51263bd78324a0f2a3de800bf53344dc597cb64d58661e711bbab9ca8 + License GPL+ or Artistic is valid and included in source files. + rest follows packaging guidelines + make test is successful with output All tests successful. + Package perl-Data-MessagePack-0.47-1.fc20 Provides: perl(Data::MessagePack) = 0.47 perl(Data::MessagePack::Boolean) perl(Data::MessagePack::PP) perl-Data-MessagePack = 0.47-1.fc20 perl-Data-MessagePack(x86-64) = 0.47-1.fc20 Requires: libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) perl = 0:5.008001 perl(B) perl(Carp) perl(Config) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rtld(GNU_HASH) suggestions: 1) I don't think you need BuildRequires: perl, it will get pulled into build environment. 2) you don't need versions in BR: or Requires: 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=tpTPTi3KV5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979660] Review Request: perl-XML-Bare - Minimal XML parser implemented via a C state engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979660 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Review: + mock build is successful for f20 + rpmlint output on rpms gave perl-XML-Bare.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US struct - strict, strut, struck perl-XML-Bare.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US struct - strict, strut, struck perl-XML-Bare.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/perl-XML-Bare-0.52/META.json perl-XML-Bare.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/perl-XML-Bare-0.52/Changes perl-XML-Bare.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/perl-XML-Bare-0.52/README perl-XML-Bare.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/XML/Bare.pm perl-XML-Bare-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/XML-Bare-0.52/parser.c perl-XML-Bare-debuginfo.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/XML-Bare-0.52/parser.c perl-XML-Bare-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/XML-Bare-0.52/parser.h 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 7 warnings. == these should be fixed + Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum) srpm tarball : dc2e425282c4d55d152329ab14dd11c65b450dfcb06e97e81b18ad1c2b237dfb upstream tarball : dc2e425282c4d55d152329ab14dd11c65b450dfcb06e97e81b18ad1c2b237dfb - License GPL+ or Artistic is not exactly valid. + rest follows packaging guidelines + make test is successful with output All tests successful. Files=11, Tests=95, 2 wallclock secs ( 0.06 usr 0.01 sys + 1.14 cusr 0.21 csys = 1.42 CPU) + Package perl-XML-Bare-0.52-1.fc20 Provides: perl(XML::Bare) = 0.52 perl(XML::Bare::Object) perl-XML-Bare = 0.52-1.fc20 perl-XML-Bare(x86-64) = 0.52-1.fc20 Requires: libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) perl(Carp) perl(Data::Dumper) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Exporter) perl(bytes) perl(strict) perl(utf8) perl(vars) rtld(GNU_HASH) suggestions: 1) Requires are not needed these should be automatically detected. Also, remove versions from BR: 2) License should be GPLv2+ or Artistic -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9b3JpLDPrfa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 977112] Review Request: CuraEngine - Engine for processing 3D models into G-code instructions for 3D printers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977112 --- Comment #2 from Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com --- Hi Miro, everything seems fine to me. I only have some minor questions: * Could you post a koji build link? I have no access to the build system from this pc. * Could you briefly comment the conditional patch and the build section directly in the spec file? Please answer the previous questions and I'll continue with the review. Best, Mario -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=J614rxwBhia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979657] Review Request: perl-XML-Tiny - Simple lightweight parser for a subset of XML
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979657 Tomas Dabašinskas tdaba...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Tomas Dabašinskas tdaba...@redhat.com --- There were no fails in fedora review, also there are no warnings from rpmlint, 2.06 is the current perl-XML-Tiny version in cpan, package tests pass, all good to go. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1zt35U02Ixa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979652] Review Request: perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier - Implementation of the Decision Trunk Classifier algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979652 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||panem...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- source rpm not found -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=snXskepwXNa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979668] Review Request: perl-HTML-Entities-Interpolate - Call HTML::Entities::encode_entities via a hash within a string
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979668 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||panem...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- source srpm not found -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DamHVlZRwOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980851] New: Review Request: xen-tools - a Xen VM provisioning/installation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980851 Bug ID: 980851 Summary: Review Request: xen-tools - a Xen VM provisioning/installation tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: raist...@linux.it QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://dariof.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/xen-tools.spec SRPM URL: - F18 http://dariof.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/xen-tools-4.3.1-1.fc18.src.rpm - F19 http://dariof.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/xen-tools-4.3.1-1.fc19.src.rpm RPM URL: - F18 http://dariof.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/noarch/xen-tools-4.3.1-1.fc18.noarch.rpm - F19 http://dariof.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/noarch/xen-tools-4.3.1-1.fc19.noarch.rpm Koji builds: - F18 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5568883 - F19 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5568882 Description: xen-tools is a collection of simple Perl scripts which allow you to easily create new guest Xen domains. Once installed and configured you can create a new Xen instance in a matter of minutes. Each new Xen domain will be complete with: * All networking details setup, with either multiple static IP addresses or DHCP. * An installation of OpenSSH. * An arbitrary set of partitions. Your new instance will be completed by having the user accounts from your guest system copied over, and you may optionally boot the image as soon as it has been created. Fedora Account System Username: dariof This is my first package and I am therefore seeking a sponsor. Upstream is here: http://www.xen-tools.org/ http://www.xen-tools.org/software/xen-tools/ The software is already packaged and included in Debian (and derived). Upstream has been informed about me doing this here: http://xen-tools.org/pipermail/xen-tools-discuss/2013-July/000983.html rpmlint: $ rpmlint SPECS/xen-tools.spec xen-tools-4.3.1-1.fc19.noarch.rpm xen-tools.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/xen-tools/xm-nfs.tmpl xen-tools.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/xen-tools/role.d/README xen-tools.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/xen-tools/xm.tmpl xen-tools.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/xen-tools/partitions.d/sample-server xen-tools.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/bash_completion.d/xen-tools xen-tools.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/xt-create-xen-config 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings xt-create-xen-config _is_not_ a devel file, it's actually an executable (one of the many perl scripts): $ rpmls /home/dario/Downloads/xen-tools-4.3.1-1.fc19.noarch.rpm|grep xen-config -rwxr-xr-x /usr/bin/xt-create-xen-config $ file /usr/bin/xt-create-xen-config /usr/bin/xt-create-xen-config: Perl script, UTF-8 Unicode text executable Regarding the others, replacing them on update is actually desirable -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FRxIX7rtDMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980399] Review Request: python-ntplib - Python module that offers a simple interface to query NTP servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980399 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Vratislav Podzimek from comment #4) (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #2) You have to add CHANGELOG and COPYING.LESSER to %doc. Hmm, that would mean some further changes as they are not installed by the setup.py anywhere. What further changes you mean? Just write %doc CHANGELOG COPYING.LESSER and rpm will do the rest. In almost all cases, such files are not installed anywhere by default. Not only in Python setup scripts, also in other software. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6QqCYP7dX3a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 927237] Review Request: owfs - 1-Wire Virtual File System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927237 Tomasz Torcz zdzi...@irc.pl changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #767410|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #19 from Tomasz Torcz zdzi...@irc.pl --- Created attachment 768204 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=768204action=edit changes in owfs.spec Hi, Spec: http://ttorcz.fedorapeople.org/owfs.spec SRPM: http://ttorcz.fedorapeople.org/owfs-2.9p1-3.fc18.src.rpm Changes: - include main copying in -tap and -mon - upstream contacted about issues: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.owfs.devel/10623 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4WUeP4Ndhka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 844721] Review request: python-django-flash - A Django extension to provide support for Rails-like flash
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844721 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|Reopened| Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Whiteboard|Stalled Submitter | Last Closed|2013-04-06 20:31:28 |2013-07-03 07:42:54 --- Comment #37 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- I've committed the necessary fixes to git master, f19 and f18 and will submit bodhi updates, too, once the builds are done. That would have been even easier, if in the f19 branch a simple git merge master had been possible, but the branches differed just in a few changelog entries/typos. For f18, the spec file contains many more conflicts with f19, so a simple merge has not been possible. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Nv61rvWhFpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 927475] Review Request: python-genlisp - Lisp ROS message and service generators
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927475
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5568948
$ rpmlint -i -v *python-genlisp.src: I: checking
python-genlisp.src: I: checking-url http://ros.org/ (timeout 10 seconds)
python-genlisp.src: I: checking-url
https://github.com/ros/genlisp/archive/8790a17484d7eeb316a4225cdd20c2acb714cc2d/genlisp-0.3.3-8790a17.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
python-genlisp.noarch: I: checking
python-genlisp.noarch: I: checking-url http://ros.org/ (timeout 10 seconds)
python-genlisp.noarch: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
python-genlisp.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gen_lisp.py
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
python-genlisp-devel.noarch: I: checking
python-genlisp-devel.noarch: I: checking-url http://ros.org/ (timeout 10
seconds)
python-genlisp-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
python-genlisp.spec: I: checking-url
https://github.com/ros/genlisp/archive/8790a17484d7eeb316a4225cdd20c2acb714cc2d/genlisp-0.3.3-8790a17.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
No manpages and no docs. Unfortunately, there's nothing which we could consider
as documentation, and it is not up to you to write a manpage.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
BSD
[.] 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 must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
54cbb6413c88f7756c5655574daf116177cfb2cec31be420320595a4aea44e6f
genlisp-0.3.3-8790a17.tar.gz
54cbb6413c88f7756c5655574daf116177cfb2cec31be420320595a4aea44e6f
genlisp-0.3.3-8790a17.tar.gz.orig
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[.] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that
[Bug 980851] Review Request: xen-tools - a Xen VM provisioning/installation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980851
Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cicku...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com ---
1. Why this? %define _binaries_in_noarch_packages_terminate_build 0
2. No need for BuildRoot tag and %defattr(-,root,root) and rm -rf
%{buildroot}, Unless you are packaging for EPEL, but please, when creating the
branch of el6, reedit the file, try not to preserve such lines in modern
packaging system.
3. For the files warned by rpmlint, are those just configs which can be
replaced when updating the package? If not add noreplace
4. %setup -q is ok, no need for -n with a name which is the default as -q.
5. I haven't tested the package, but are these perl requires cannot be detected
by RPM when installing:
Requires: perl(Text::Template)
Requires: perl(Config::IniFiles)
Requires: perl(File::Which)
Requires: perl(File::Slurp)
Requires: perl(Data::Dumper)
If they can be automatically added when install xen-tools in a pure clean
environment, please remove them IMO.
6. Hmm..a README under /etc, will you consider a move of it?
7. Consider the glob, I think you can shrink the size of spec. And use %{name}
to replace xen-tools in %files if you like.
I'm not a sponsor, but these reviews hope can be considered.
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=ynLa4o1lG5a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979668] Review Request: perl-HTML-Entities-Interpolate - Call HTML::Entities::encode_entities via a hash within a string
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979668 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Parag AN(पराग) from comment #2) source srpm not found Please check again, sorry. NEW SPEC URL: http://cicku.me/perl-HTML-Entities-Interpolate.spec NEW SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/perl-HTML-Entities-Interpolate-1.04-1.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=sSBcHokhoaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980851] Review Request: xen-tools - a Xen VM provisioning/installation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980851
--- Comment #2 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
2.
A good suggestion. %defattr is not needed by any active distribution release
anymore, because all include RPM = 4.4. When packaging for EPEL, think twice
about how often you would copy from Fedora instead of creating a more losely
connected branch.
4.
-q is short for quiet output, without -q %setup would list the contents of
tarballs when extracting them. Dropping -q can be helpful sometimes.
For -n the default is %{name}-%{version}, and therefore it could be dropped,
but if there is frequent need to package pre-/post-releases, it can be
convenient to keep the -n %name-%version parameter since that makes it easy to
adjust the top builddir as necessary for pre-/post-release directory names.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fEXbAuLF1xa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979652] Review Request: perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier - Implementation of the Decision Trunk Classifier algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979652 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Correct the SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier-1.0.1-1.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=7lVjMP2jJra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979657] Review Request: perl-XML-Tiny - Simple lightweight parser for a subset of XML
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979657 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-XML-Tiny Short Description: Simple lightweight parser for a subset of XML Owners: cicku Branches: 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=ZWl2BKLXoPa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979665] Review Request: perl-Data-MessagePack - MessagePack serialising/deserialising
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979665 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Data-MessagePack Short Description: MessagePack serialising/deserialising Owners: cicku Branches: 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=97jURcFliva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979660] Review Request: perl-XML-Bare - Minimal XML parser implemented via a C state engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979660 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Will fixed later. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UG4D9yN1r0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 658754] Review Request: CUBRID - a very fast and reliable open source SQL database server.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658754
--- Comment #24 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Just a drop by comment:
2. Please, don't define the Release tag like %{release}%{?dist},
just replace it with 1%{?dist} is easy, right? You use about 30
chars space to define a macro of 1, jesus..
The much better reason why not to complicate the Release tag is that the
%{release} variable is defined by the Release tag already. You've had
$ grep release cubrid.spec
%define release4
Release: %{release}%{?dist}
and afterwards, %release would not be 4 anymore, but would get the value of
whatever the full Release tag expands to, e.g. 4.fc19 depending on %dist.
Similarly for variables defined by tags like Name - %{name}, Version -
%{version}. Redefining those variables can make the spec file less clear.
%define libdir %{_prefix}/lib
…
%{libdir}/libcmstat.so
%{libdir}/libbrokeradmin.so.%{cubrid_version}
%{libdir}/libbrokeradmin.so.8
…
Even if a future version will fix that indeed, till then it won't be acceptable
to store arch-specific libs in /usr/lib instead of the default %{_libdir}.
%{libdir}/libbrokeradmin.la
libtool archives -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
%{libdir}/libcascci.so
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=egISuvu9eia=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980399] Review Request: python-ntplib - Python module that offers a simple interface to query NTP servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980399 --- Comment #6 from Vratislav Podzimek vpodz...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #5) (In reply to Vratislav Podzimek from comment #4) (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #2) You have to add CHANGELOG and COPYING.LESSER to %doc. Hmm, that would mean some further changes as they are not installed by the setup.py anywhere. What further changes you mean? Just write %doc CHANGELOG COPYING.LESSER and rpm will do the rest. In almost all cases, such files are not installed anywhere by default. Not only in Python setup scripts, also in other software. Great, thanks! I didn't know %doc works that way. I've updated the .spec 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=6E9o1Yc8HFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931
--- Comment #23 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5569032
$ rpmlint -i -v *
homerun.src: I: checking
homerun.src: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.src: I: checking-url
http://download.kde.org/stable/homerun/src/homerun-1.0.0.tar.bz2 (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.i686: I: checking
homerun.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.i686: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun.i686: W: gzipped-svg-icon
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/homerun.svgz
Not all desktop environments that support SVG icons support them gzipped
(.svgz). Install the icon as plain uncompressed SVG.
homerun.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary homerunviewer
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
homerun.x86_64: I: checking
homerun.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/homerun.svgz
Not all desktop environments that support SVG icons support them gzipped
(.svgz). Install the icon as plain uncompressed SVG.
homerun.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary homerunviewer
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
homerun-debuginfo.i686: I: checking
homerun-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun
(timeout 10 seconds)
homerun-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking
homerun-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun
(timeout 10 seconds)
homerun-devel.i686: I: checking
homerun-devel.i686: W: no-dependency-on homerun/homerun-libs/libhomerun
homerun-devel.i686: E: description-line-too-long C The homerun-devel package
contains all the development files of the homerun launcher.
Your description lines must not exceed 80 characters. If a line is exceeding
this number, cut it to fit in two lines.
homerun-devel.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun-devel.x86_64: I: checking
homerun-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on homerun/homerun-libs/libhomerun
homerun-devel.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The homerun-devel package
contains all the development files of the homerun launcher.
Your description lines must not exceed 80 characters. If a line is exceeding
this number, cut it to fit in two lines.
homerun-devel.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout
10 seconds)
homerun-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun-libs.i686: I: checking
homerun-libs.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun-libs.i686: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun-libs.x86_64: I: checking
homerun-libs.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout
10 seconds)
homerun-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun.spec: I: checking-url
http://download.kde.org/stable/homerun/src/homerun-1.0.0.tar.bz2 (timeout 10
seconds)
9 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 12 warnings.
No manpages, no docs in devel packages, no problem at all.
Some issues to be fixed:
The description line for the devel package is too long. Not in your text
editor, admittedly. But note, macros will be expanded and then the line becomes
longer. Split it in two lines, and rpmlint is happy again.
I don't know how critical is it to ship an svgz icon, but as long as it is
recognized correctly by the application, you should use the unzipped version.
Some runtime dependencies are still missing. The main package as well as the
-devel package need the -libs package. Add this line to both packages:
Requires: %{name}-libs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=bpdikp843za=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979652] Review Request: perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier - Implementation of the Decision Trunk Classifier algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979652
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com ---
Review:
+ mock build is successful for f20
- rpmlint output on rpms gave
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/Classification.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/Classification.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/Util.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/Util.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/DataWrapper.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/DataWrapper.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/DecisionTrunk.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/DecisionTrunk.pm
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier-debuginfo.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C
This package provides debug information for package
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier.
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/Algorithm-TrunkClassifier-v1.0.1/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/src/feature_selection.c
perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/Algorithm-TrunkClassifier-v1.0.1/Algorithm/TrunkClassifier/src/feature_selection.h
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 9 errors, 2 warnings.
== Fix these messages
+ Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum)
srpm tarball : e60ef3e6d189f007fe1f2d8424dda5e8ba072d4f0387b65ae0e9230abfba4c8a
upstream tarball :
e60ef3e6d189f007fe1f2d8424dda5e8ba072d4f0387b65ae0e9230abfba4c8a
+ License Freely redistributable without restriction is valid.
+ rest follows packaging guidelines
+ make test is successful with output
No tests defined.
+ package perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier-1.0.1-1.fc20
Provides: perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier) = 1.0.1
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::Classification) = 1.0.1
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::CommandProcessor) = 1.0.1
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::DataWrapper) = 1.0.1
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::DecisionTrunk) = 1.0.1
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::FeatureSelection) = 1.0.1
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::Util) = 1.0.1 perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier =
1.0.1-1.fc20 perl-Algorithm-TrunkClassifier(x86-64) = 1.0.1-1.fc20
Requires: libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) perl = 1:5.01
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::Classification)
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::CommandProcessor)
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::DataWrapper)
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::DecisionTrunk)
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::FeatureSelection)
perl(Algorithm::TrunkClassifier::Util) perl(Exporter) perl(POSIX)
perl(XSLoader) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rtld(GNU_HASH)
suggestions:
1) BR: perl not needed
2) rpmlint messages can be fixed by adding following in %prep
find . -type f -exec chmod -x {} 2/dev/null \;
3) Fix the description too long rpmlint message
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=I7WZgiW2TLa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 734531] Review Request: unison240 - File synchronisation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734531 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=OIC9F6YaxFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 734531] Review Request: unison240 - File synchronisation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734531 --- 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=gvikfd990Ga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979657] Review Request: perl-XML-Tiny - Simple lightweight parser for a subset of XML
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979657 --- 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=mPlTxSiZKXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979657] Review Request: perl-XML-Tiny - Simple lightweight parser for a subset of XML
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979657 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=H5CcLITh0Pa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979661] Review Request: perl-Net-Random - A module gets random data from online sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979661 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=glXtbwHdTba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 --- Comment #24 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Not all desktop environments that support SVG icons support them gzipped (.svgz). Install the icon as plain uncompressed SVG. Please don't make suggestions for which there aren't packaging guidelines. This one, imo, is unwise: 1. DE's not supporting svgz is a DE failing/bug, not a packaging one (again, until supported by guidelines saying so) 2. any desktop that doesn't support svg, should fallback to unscalable icons (and if they don't, again, it's a DE failing/bug, not a packaging problem). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pYO6DSSVuQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979653] Review Request: perl-Perl6-Slurp - Implemention of the Perl 6 'slurp' built-in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979653 --- 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=yKcv2M1qB2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979661] Review Request: perl-Net-Random - A module gets random data from online sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979661 --- 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=3rBdZAFH8ca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979653] Review Request: perl-Perl6-Slurp - Implemention of the Perl 6 'slurp' built-in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979653 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=YOy0PqTmWOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970929] Review Request: php-nrk-Predis - PHP client library for Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970929 --- Comment #10 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=NHc3AfyxNea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970929] Review Request: php-nrk-Predis - PHP client library for Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970929 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=itHzF09rHDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979668] Review Request: perl-HTML-Entities-Interpolate - Call HTML::Entities::encode_entities via a hash within a string
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979668 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com --- Review: + mock build is successful for f20 + rpmlint output on rpms gave 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. + Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum) srpm trball : efc22c4aa1fbe26112a53e4e637c7632b48ea429f2648cdb3207fc003e7540f9 upstream tarball : efc22c4aa1fbe26112a53e4e637c7632b48ea429f2648cdb3207fc003e7540f9 - License GPLv2+ or Artistic is NOT valid. I see its Artistic 1.0 + rest follows packaging guidelines + make test is successful with output All tests successful. Files=2, Tests=2, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.06 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.10 CPU) + Package perl-HTML-Entities-Interpolate-1.04-1.fc20 Provides: perl(HTML::Entities::Interpolate) = 1.04 perl-HTML-Entities-Interpolate = 1.04-1.fc20 Requires: perl(HTML::Entities) perl(Tie::Function) perl(warnings) Suggestions: 1) Get the license clarified with upstream. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9sCz8z6ZFNa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979663] Review Request: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies - Find dependencies for modules on CPAN
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979663 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=NA7g90Zxgoa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979663] Review Request: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies - Find dependencies for modules on CPAN
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979663 --- 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=n67aYtOPcSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957693] Review Request: gfal2-python - Python bindings for gfal 2.0
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957693 Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2013-07-03 09:07:20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=oHzQqaoMvka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971049] Review Request: davix - Toolkit for Http-based file management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971049 Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2013-07-03 09:07:10 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kIuUKlueoca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979665] Review Request: perl-Data-MessagePack - MessagePack serialising/deserialising
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979665 --- 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=InXZCwBck2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979667] Review Request: perl-Tie-Function - Wrap functions in tied hash sugar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979667 --- 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=E8H5cb6W5Ia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979667] Review Request: perl-Tie-Function - Wrap functions in tied hash sugar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979667 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=dxuASMMNWBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979665] Review Request: perl-Data-MessagePack - MessagePack serialising/deserialising
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979665 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=HmFBX3DnAOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979673] Review Request: perl-File-Find-Object - Object oriented File::Find replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979673 --- 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=W4IUeJkDkFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979673] Review Request: perl-File-Find-Object - Object oriented File::Find replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979673 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |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=xSCZ6jT5Dea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 844755] Review Request: select2 - jQuery based replacement for select boxes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844755 Richard Marko rma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Flags|needinfo?(rma...@redhat.com | |) | Last Closed||2013-07-03 09:21:03 --- Comment #2 from Richard Marko rma...@redhat.com --- It should be possible to use uglify.js which is packaged in Fedora to create minified versions but I have no interest to finish it at this time. I'll open a new request if I get back to 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=GpnN8Vt2Rna=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975590] Review Request: openstack-selinux - SELinux policies for OpenStack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975590 Lon Hohberger l...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Lon Hohberger l...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: openstack-selinux Short Description: SELinux policies for OpenStack Owners: lon Branches: el6 InitialCC: 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=BuhV1IDh8ja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980908] New: Review Request: python-flask-principal - Identity management for Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980908 Bug ID: 980908 Summary: Review Request: python-flask-principal - Identity management for Flask applications Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: rma...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://rmarko.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-flask-principal.spec SRPM URL: http://rmarko.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-flask-principal-0.4.0-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Identity management for Flask applications Fedora Account System Username: rmarko -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=a9oVVx1GlSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 --- Comment #25 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Rex Dieter from comment #24) Not all desktop environments that support SVG icons support them gzipped (.svgz). Install the icon as plain uncompressed SVG. Please don't make suggestions for which there aren't packaging guidelines. This one, imo, is unwise: 1. DE's not supporting svgz is a DE failing/bug, not a packaging one (again, until supported by guidelines saying so) Maybe I'm unwise, but the cited sentence comes from rpmlint directly. I don't know which messages from our best checking tool are serious, and which ones are just blurb and not useful. Good to know that we are now sure to have another message which belongs to the latter group :) OK, then leave the svgz icon as is. BTW, this senseless message from rpmlint is worth to be reported as a bug. 2. any desktop that doesn't support svg, should fallback to unscalable icons (and if they don't, again, it's a DE failing/bug, not a packaging problem). The question is, does it make sense at all to use a KDE-related application launcher on a minimalistic desktop which doesn't support SVG? We shouldn't bother with problems which come up due to patchwork use of tools which are not intended for. An example from the other side: The dockbar Docky is designed for Gnome, and the included folder viewer cannot be configured so that Dolphin will be opened. Means, the applet takes the file manager association from Gio, which is not directly configurable. Besides the lots of dependencies (including all the Mono stuff) it is not fully usable anyway, and this is not to be considered as a 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=DoAOutntr1a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980908] Review Request: python-flask-principal - Identity management for Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980908 Richard Marko rma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rma...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Richard Marko rma...@redhat.com --- Patch adding LICENSE file to distribution tarball sent upstream. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=eLVahbXPDXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 --- Comment #26 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- OK, then leave the svgz icon as is. BTW, this senseless message from rpmlint is worth to be reported as a bug. Indeed, it's a long-standing problem that rpmlint's policies sometimes do not match our current guidelines. (and a pet-peave of mine, why I'm commenting here). My point is SHOULD/MUST packaging guidelines trump what rpmlint says. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=T2cBHr7m8Ca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980907] New: Review Request: python-flask-login - User session management for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980907 Bug ID: 980907 Summary: Review Request: python-flask-login - User session management for Flask Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: rma...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://rmarko.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-flask-login.spec SRPM URL: http://rmarko.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-flask-login-0.2.4-1.fc18.noarch.rpm Description: User session management for Flask Fedora Account System Username: rmarko -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JCvOYStf6Qa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 --- Comment #27 from Joseph Marrero jmarr...@gmail.com --- http://ece.uprm.edu/jmarrero/fedora_packaging/homerun/homerun.spec http://ece.uprm.edu/jmarrero/fedora_packaging/homerun/homerun-1.0.0-4.fc19.src.rpm old packages: http://ece.uprm.edu/jmarrero/fedora_packaging/homerun/old/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=h7oR6ckCWSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 959649] Review Request: drupal7-l10n_server - Localization server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959649
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5569367
$ rpmlint -i -v *
drupal7-l10n_server.src: I: checking
drupal7-l10n_server.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US og - go, pg,
of
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-l10n_server.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US drupal -
drupe
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-l10n_server.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gettext - get
text, get-text, Georgette
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-l10n_server.src: I: checking-url http://drupal.org/project/l10n_server
(timeout 10 seconds)
drupal7-l10n_server.src: I: checking-url
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/l10n_server-7.x-1.x-dev.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
drupal7-l10n_server.noarch: I: checking
drupal7-l10n_server.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US og - go,
pg, of
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-l10n_server.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US drupal -
drupe
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-l10n_server.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gettext -
get text, get-text, Georgette
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-l10n_server.noarch: I: checking-url
http://drupal.org/project/l10n_server (timeout 10 seconds)
drupal7-l10n_server.spec: I: checking-url
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/l10n_server-7.x-1.x-dev.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
Ignorable spelling errors only.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
GPLv2+
[+] 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 must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
90e1418d2e27b2180005b9aec5f19f9942cc01af9872cc6f58fbb55d7cec6375
l10n_server-7.x-1.x-dev.tar.gz
90e1418d2e27b2180005b9aec5f19f9942cc01af9872cc6f58fbb55d7cec6375
l10n_server-7.x-1.x-dev.tar.gz.orig
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[.] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic
[Bug 957693] Review Request: gfal2-python - Python bindings for gfal 2.0
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957693 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4R0mhcd6nFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979702] Review Request: qgifer - A video-based animated GIF creator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979702
--- Comment #2 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com ---
Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/QGifer/qgifer.spec
SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/QGifer/qgifer-0.2.1-2.fc19.src.rpm
- Explicit Requires removed (qt,giflib)
- %%{_datadir}/%%{name} subdirs are now owned by the package
- %%find_lang macro temporarily replaced due to BZ #729336
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WMI3vChbaIa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 --- Comment #28 from Joseph Marrero jmarr...@gmail.com --- Koji Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5569387 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=754faImsSpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 959649] Review Request: drupal7-l10n_server - Localization server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959649 Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Shawn Iwinski shawn.iwin...@gmail.com --- THANKS for the review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: drupal7-l10n_server Short Description: Localization server Owners: siwinski asrob Branches: f17 f18 f19 el5 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=T53SzCoxG3a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #29 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
$ rpmlint -i -v *
homerun.src: I: checking
homerun.src: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.src: I: checking-url
http://download.kde.org/stable/homerun/src/homerun-1.0.0.tar.bz2 (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.i686: I: checking
homerun.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.i686: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun.i686: W: gzipped-svg-icon
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/homerun.svgz
Not all desktop environments that support SVG icons support them gzipped
(.svgz). Install the icon as plain uncompressed SVG.
homerun.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary homerunviewer
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
homerun.x86_64: I: checking
homerun.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/homerun.svgz
Not all desktop environments that support SVG icons support them gzipped
(.svgz). Install the icon as plain uncompressed SVG.
homerun.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary homerunviewer
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
homerun-debuginfo.i686: I: checking
homerun-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun
(timeout 10 seconds)
homerun-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking
homerun-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun
(timeout 10 seconds)
homerun-devel.i686: I: checking
homerun-devel.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun-devel.x86_64: I: checking
homerun-devel.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout
10 seconds)
homerun-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun-libs.i686: I: checking
homerun-libs.i686: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout 10
seconds)
homerun-libs.i686: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun-libs.x86_64: I: checking
homerun-libs.x86_64: I: checking-url http://userbase.kde.org/Homerun (timeout
10 seconds)
homerun-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
homerun.spec: I: checking-url
http://download.kde.org/stable/homerun/src/homerun-1.0.0.tar.bz2 (timeout 10
seconds)
9 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.
The svgz issue and the missing manpages and docs have been discussed already.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
Special licensing according to the decisions from KDE e.V.
[.] 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 must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
7748fde872263dc66203d03cdcd3b71f3aae1d83718881ae7e08548d357a65a9
homerun-1.0.0.tar.bz2
7748fde872263dc66203d03cdcd3b71f3aae1d83718881ae7e08548d357a65a9
homerun-1.0.0.tar.bz2.orig
[+]
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931
--- Comment #30 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #29)
Still one issue:
The /sbin/ldconfig call belongs to the -libs package:
%post libs
/sbin/ldconfig
%postun libs
/sbin/ldconfig
That's why the additional call in %post and %postun is unneeded. The main
package doesn't contain any libs. Remove the appropriate lines before
importing your files to the Git repo.
To clarify this:
%{_kde4_libdir}/kde4/homerun_source_recentdocuments.so
%{_kde4_libdir}/kde4/plasma_applet_homerunlauncher.so
Those files are libraries, but not in a common linker path, they are just for
private use in Homerun itself. @Rex, please correct me if I'm wrong.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cU6SR6Rsjqa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 --- Comment #31 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- correct, those are largely plugins, and not in linker path, so no need for ldconfig in the main pkg -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=uxX5kfiEHea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980934] New: Review Request: gstreamer-omx - GStreamer OpenMAX IL wrapper plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980934 Bug ID: 980934 Summary: Review Request: gstreamer-omx - GStreamer OpenMAX IL wrapper plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: pbrobin...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org SPEC: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer-omx.spec SRPM: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer-omx-1.0.0-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: This plugin wraps available OpenMAX IL components and makes them available as standard GStreamer elements. koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5569649 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kaLIWXkInsa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 879881] Review Request: gst-openmax - OpenMAX plugin for gstreamer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879881 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2013-07-03 11:15:34 --- Comment #14 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com --- As this review is dead and unresponsive I've submitted a new one with the latest package etc. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 980934 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4lxKZjSIzha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980934] Review Request: gstreamer-omx - GStreamer OpenMAX IL wrapper plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980934 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) CC||rlawren...@myseneca.ca --- Comment #1 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com --- *** Bug 879881 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qf3KuIgtOJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 959651] Review Request: drupal7-tmgmt - Translation Management Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959651
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5569661
$ rpmlint -i -v *drupal7-tmgmt.src: I: checking
drupal7-tmgmt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US workflow - work
flow, work-flow, workforce
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-tmgmt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US php - pp, hp, pep
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-tmgmt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ui - ii, u, i
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-tmgmt.src: I: checking-url http://drupal.org/project/tmgmt (timeout 10
seconds)
drupal7-tmgmt.src: I: checking-url
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/tmgmt-7.x-1.0-alpha3.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
drupal7-tmgmt.noarch: I: checking
drupal7-tmgmt.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US workflow - work
flow, work-flow, workforce
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-tmgmt.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US php - pp, hp,
pep
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-tmgmt.noarch: I: checking-url http://drupal.org/project/tmgmt (timeout
10 seconds)
drupal7-tmgmt.spec: I: checking-url
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/tmgmt-7.x-1.0-alpha3.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
Nothing of interest.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
GPLv2+
[+] 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 must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
1407a819a52d5746514e0667a16e4e628a0e9ce8fa16c411cd222fb2dbb41756
tmgmt-7.x-1.0-alpha3.tar.gz
1407a819a52d5746514e0667a16e4e628a0e9ce8fa16c411cd222fb2dbb41756
tmgmt-7.x-1.0-alpha3.tar.gz.orig
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[.] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along
[Bug 896087] Review Request: prototype - JavaScript framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896087 Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ade...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ade...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=44ApCqHwNla=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980937] New: Review Request: abi-dumper - Tool to dump ABI of an ELF object containing DWARF debug info
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980937 Bug ID: 980937 Summary: Review Request: abi-dumper - Tool to dump ABI of an ELF object containing DWARF debug info Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: hobbes1...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/abi-dumper.spec SRPM URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/abi-dumper-0.98-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: A tool to dump ABI of an ELF object containing DWARF debug info. The tool is intended to be used with ABI Compliance Checker tool for tracking ABI changes of a C/C++ library or kernel module. Fedora Account System Username: hobbes1069 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LWbFHO8gQUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 Joseph Marrero jmarr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #32 from Joseph Marrero jmarr...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: homerun Short Description: Application Launcher for KDE Owners: jmarrero Branches: 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=KTNUvrnzC6a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 956931] Review Request: homerun - Application Launcher for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956931 --- Comment #33 from Joseph Marrero jmarr...@gmail.com --- Thank you both for your time and help :) I will post here the src.rpm and spec with the %post and %postun fixed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LiAU01ifICa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 980851] Review Request: xen-tools - a Xen VM provisioning/installation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980851
--- Comment #3 from Dario Faggioli raist...@linux.it ---
First of all, thanks a lot for the review!
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #1)
1. Why this? %define _binaries_in_noarch_packages_terminate_build 0
AhAh, here's an easy one! The reason why it is there is that I forgot to remove
it! :-(
Thanks for noticing it, I'll kill it and update the spec.
2. No need for BuildRoot tag and %defattr(-,root,root) and rm -rf
%{buildroot}, Unless you are packaging for EPEL, but please, when creating
the branch of el6, reedit the file, try not to preserve such lines in modern
packaging system.
Mmm... sorry but I'm not sure I got everything you said. I put/kept those lines
in the spec file because I found similar ones in most of the spec files I
looked at while seeking inspiration for writing mine. :-)
Also, I'm not sure I want to package this for EPEL yet. Anyway, if you're
saying that I do not need those lines for now, and I should only re-consider
adding them later, if/when I decide to package this for EPEL, then I'm fine
with that and will remove them.
If, OTOH, you were saying something different, could you please excuse me and
clarify?
3. For the files warned by rpmlint, are those just configs which can be
replaced when updating the package? If not add noreplace
Yes, I have a couple of (noreplace), for things in /etc that I want preserved
across updates. Those ones it complains about are either sample, template or
explanatory files that I actually _do_ want to be updated, so I feel like I
should not (noreplace) them. Should I suppress the warning somehow else?
4. %setup -q is ok, no need for -n with a name which is the default as -q.
Yes, I knew it was redundant, and it was there for the reasons Michael (Comment
2) is mentioning. However, I agree, and I'll kill it until I'll need it. Thanks
again.
5. I haven't tested the package, but are these perl requires cannot be
detected by RPM when installing:
Requires: perl(Text::Template)
Requires: perl(Config::IniFiles)
Requires: perl(File::Which)
Requires: perl(File::Slurp)
Requires: perl(Data::Dumper)
Oh, I see... I'll double check that and remove the unnecessary 'Requires:',
thanks.
6. Hmm..a README under /etc, will you consider a move of it?
I see what you mean. However, that files provides specific instructions on what
happens to the files in /etc/xen-tools/role.d/. It's a lot like
'/etc/grub.d/README'. So, yes, I can think about moving it, if that is
considered preferrable, but it looks to me that it can actually live there too.
I'm living it there for now, let's see what other thinks...
7. Consider the glob, I think you can shrink the size of spec. And use
%{name} to replace xen-tools in %files if you like.
What do you mean by Consider the glob, I think you can shrink the size of
spec? About using %{name}, good point, I will do that.
I'm not a sponsor, but these reviews hope can be considered.
Well, I'm certainly really happy about it... Thanks a lot for doing this,
revised spec and pkgs coming soon.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1CzYFeeEOha=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 959665] Review Request: drupal7-lang_dropdown - Provides a dropdown select to switch between available languages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959665
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
||m
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5569709
$ rpmlint -i -v *drupal7-lang_dropdown.src: I: checking
drupal7-lang_dropdown.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dropdown - drop
down, drop-down, drown
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-lang_dropdown.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lang -
Lang, lag, slang
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-lang_dropdown.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dropdown -
drop down, drop-down, drown
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-lang_dropdown.src: I: checking-url
http://drupal.org/project/lang_dropdown (timeout 10 seconds)
drupal7-lang_dropdown.src: I: checking-url
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/lang_dropdown-7.x-1.5.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
drupal7-lang_dropdown.noarch: I: checking
drupal7-lang_dropdown.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dropdown - drop
down, drop-down, drown
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-lang_dropdown.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lang -
Lang, lag, slang
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-lang_dropdown.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dropdown
- drop down, drop-down, drown
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
drupal7-lang_dropdown.noarch: I: checking-url
http://drupal.org/project/lang_dropdown (timeout 10 seconds)
drupal7-lang_dropdown.spec: I: checking-url
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/lang_dropdown-7.x-1.5.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
OK.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
GPLv2+
[+] 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 must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
1cfe4545d61333a8045c446489eb1d87f508a499f12274bfbd5dbd4a98f41ca7
lang_dropdown-7.x-1.5.tar.gz
1cfe4545d61333a8045c446489eb1d87f508a499f12274bfbd5dbd4a98f41ca7
lang_dropdown-7.x-1.5.tar.gz.orig
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[.] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just
