[Bug 977208] Review Request: Phalcon - A web framework implemented as a C extension
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977208 --- Comment #29 from Roman Mohr ro...@fenkhuber.at --- (In reply to Renich Bon Ciric from comment #28) Ok, upstream said (paraphrased): I've never tried compiling in PPC or ARM; so I don't know Let's just remove that restriction and see what happens. If there is a way of marking non X86/X86_64 arches as experimental, it would be cool. Hi Reich, I still have them. I will send you an email tonight. Btw, if anyone has an SRPM, I'd appreciate it. Otherwize, gotta restart the SPEC. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mbVwhQpMK5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006197] Review Request: stockfish - Powerful open source chess engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006197 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #6 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- (In reply to Dhiru Kholia from comment #5) I still need to think about using (or fixing) those upstream provided compiler flags. Well, you MUST use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS/%optflags to make sure the binaries are compatible to all current and futures architectures and features supported by Fedora and its build infrastructure. That said, * -g -O3 doesn't provide substantial advantages over -g -O2 * -msse is implied by Fedora's gcc's implicit default set of cflags on architectures it is applicatible. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZL4Ak9q0Wva=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 Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||echevemas...@gmail.com --- Comment #13 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- Dario, package has a FTBFS due to POD failure, here an extract of the error. cd bin; for i in *-*[!y]; do pod2man --release=4.3.1 --official --section=8 $i ../man/$i.8; done xen-create-image around line 758: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xen-create-nfs around line 90: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xen-delete-image around line 137: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xen-list-images around line 64: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xen-update-image around line 87: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xt-create-xen-config around line 111: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xt-customize-image around line 67: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xt-guess-suite-and-mirror around line 36: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. xt-install-image around line 89: Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'Stéphane'. Assuming UTF-8 POD document had syntax errors at /usr/bin/pod2man line 69. make: *** [manpages] Error 255 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Ci4epT (%install) seems that error was fixed in fbc903877a6c5a5858c5ed44a91253b364de522c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QGmPUR3l05a=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 #14 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- this just occurs with perl 5.18, available in F20 and rawhide -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=i1wZA9H7ZIa=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 #15 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- Why the package doesn't have xen-hypervisor as dependency? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nHttRlZJYea=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 #16 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Another question is that why we need Requires: debootstrap? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=oMJT8W3bONa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880203] Review Request: rubygem-strong_parameters - Permitted and required parameters for Action Pack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880203 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Flags|needinfo?(jstribny@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #4 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Hi Ken, thanks for taking the review! Would you mind unmarking tests as %doc? Sure, this is a mistake. you should run gem unpack and gem spec in %prep, gem build in %build, etc. I will disagree with you here, %gem_install macro is completely sufficient and it's used this way in some gems. I am not patching anything, so those steps are redundant. But I moved it to %build, where it originally belongs. update to the latest upstream Done. and update the License field to MIT Good catch, changed. Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5921913 SRPM: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1914/5921914/rubygem-strong_parameters-0.2.1-1.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=PlPqofgCo5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 892314] Review Request: rubygem-unf_ext - Unicode Normalization Form support library for CRuby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892314 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jstri...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jstri...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Taking. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=x2xNmA8ZOCa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 860249] Review Request: adobe-source-code-pro-fonts - A set of mono-spaced OpenType fonts designed for coding environments
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|package-review@lists.fedora |
|project.org |
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dan.mas...@gmail.com
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #51 from Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com ---
There is a lot of noise with this review so I'm just going to get this over
with.
Naming: OK (cant find any dupes with files or naming)
Licensing: OK (OFL/SIL)
Build on rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5921976
Build on f19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5921978
Build on el6: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5921980
Installing the package was successful.
Not too sure how to test.
fedora-review results:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
[Bug 892314] Review Request: rubygem-unf_ext - Unicode Normalization Form support library for CRuby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892314
--- Comment #4 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com ---
1, Description of -doc subpackage should end with a dot (.) according to
guidelines.
2, %doc%{gem_instdir}/[A-Z]* seems too vague to me, please mention README
and LICENSE explicitly so it's clear that they are present.
3, Gemfile, Rakefile and original .gemspec could be kept in -doc for
clarification rather than excluded.
4, Keep the test suite in doc rather than excluding it.
Otherwise the package builds, installs and runs, rpmlint doesn't complain.
Please fix the issues 1, 2 and 4, and consider no. 3 so I can approve.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=SklFzUO6a3a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979749] Review Request: rubygem-time-lord - Managing concepts of time and space in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979749 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jstri...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jstri...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Taking. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=y9kuqKFMTva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 979749] Review Request: rubygem-time-lord - Managing concepts of time and space in Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979749
--- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com ---
1, # I filed a bug on this upstream, but this works around it for now.
In such cases. please always include the link to the upstream bug.
2, The package should BuildRequires: ruby(release) for = f19 and
BuildRequires: ruby(abi) for f19
3, Please change BuildRequires of rubygem(timecop), rubygem(yard),
rubygem(pry), ... to the new syntax: rubygem-timecop, rubygem-yard,
rubygem-pry, ...
4, Don't use rake for running the test suite, ideally use MiniTest. See the
guidelines [1]
5, Get rid of Bundler dependency as it's not needed and it's problematic to use
in packages.
6, 'pry', 'coveralls', 'timecop' are listed as development dependencies... are
they really needed for tests? I think if you delete those lines from the test
suite, it will work without them. Less dependencies - better.
7, Introduce -doc subpackage according to guidelines [1], separate files, mark
%doc files, exclude gem cache and keep the rakefile:
For main package:
%files
%dir %{gem_instdir}
%{gem_libdir}
%exclude %{gem_cache}
%{gem_spec}
%doc %{gem_instdir}/COPYRIGHT
For -doc subpackage:
%files doc
%doc %{gem_instdir}/README.md
%doc %{gem_docdir}
%{gem_instdir}/Rakefile
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby?rd=Packaging/Ruby
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=XkfMvOEoT5a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006461] Review Request: munge-maven-plugin - Munge Maven Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006461 Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2013-09-11 06:44:11 --- Comment #7 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com --- Built for rawhide. Closing. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5922158 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=W80tNws1AKa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006837] New: Review Request: libgssglue - unretire
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006837 Bug ID: 1006837 Summary: Review Request: libgssglue - unretire Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jkast...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Description of problem: conserver rely on libgssapi or libgssglue (which obsoletes libgssapi). unfortunately libgssglue was retired, which breakes conserver dependencies. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JLHCuNGdsXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006837] Review Request: libgssglue - unretire
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006837 --- Comment #1 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com --- SRPM: http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/19/Everything/source/SRPMS/l/libgssglue-0.4-2.fc19.src.rpm SPEC: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/libgssglue.git/plain/libgssglue.spec?h=f19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=enD5ZTJgtHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915920] Review Request: qt5-qtsvg - Qt5 - QtSvg component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915920 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | 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=sLhoDgAnOga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006860] New: Review Request: libnatpmp - Library of The NAT Port Mapping Protocol (NAT-PMP)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006860 Bug ID: 1006860 Summary: Review Request: libnatpmp - Library of The NAT Port Mapping Protocol (NAT-PMP) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: cicku...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://cicku.me/libnatpmp.spec SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/libnatpmp-20130911-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: libnatpmp is an attempt to make a portable and fully compliant implementation of the protocol for the client side. It is based on non blocking sockets and all calls of the API are asynchronous. It is therefore very easy to integrate the NAT-PMP code to any event driven code. Fedora Account System Username: cicku -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=MmkyebxWGsa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 917074] Review Request: rubygem-angular-rails - Helpers for angularjs in a rails project
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=917074 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jstri...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jstri...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- This would not work for rawhide, you have to require Ruby as Requires: ruby(release). Please see the updated guidelines on this, the new %gem_install macro etc.[1]. Please, make those changes as they are required for fedora 19 and higher. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=d5YMwi42Ata=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1001818] Review Request: rubygem-table_print - shows objects in nicely formatted columns for easy reading
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001818 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | CC||jstri...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Please update to the latest packaging guidelines. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=YHyepRXonJa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915144] Review Request: rasmol - Molecular Graphics Visualization Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915144
Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|package-review@lists.fedora |
|project.org |
Flags|needinfo?(bjoern.esser@gmai |
|l.com) |
--- Comment #31 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com ---
Sorry for the huge delay here. Your package has some small issues left.
#
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
--- License is fine.
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
--- the -doc pkg misses some of the license-files. In fact the files
named NOTICE and RASLIC carry some imported notes on license, too.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps
--- your package MUST Requires: hicolor-icon-theme
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
contains icons.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[!]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 481280 bytes in 20 files.
--- the ChangeLog-folder just contains split copies of ChangeLog.txt,
so you can purge it from being included. The whole %doc in the
arched pkg is about the same size as the binaries within. I'd
recommend to move all, but GPL, NOTICE, RASLIC, to the -doc pkg.
You will need to include NOTICE and RASLIC into the -doc, too,
because these files carry some important informations about
licensing/copyright as well.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
--- issues are present
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII
[Bug 998496] Review Request: perl-perl5i - Fix as much of Perl 5 as possible in one pragma
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998496 Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jples...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jples...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JvojX4SeOba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006837] Review Request: libgssglue - unretire
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006837 Till Maas opensou...@till.name changed: What|Removed |Added CC||opensou...@till.name --- Comment #2 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name --- Did you figure out why it was retired in the first place? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nzyiEN2Y2Sa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006104] Review Request: gqrx - Software defined radio receiver powered by GNU Radio and Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006104 Josh Bressers bress...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Flags|needinfo?(bressers@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #10 from Josh Bressers bress...@redhat.com --- Thank you for the update. I'd confused myself it would seem. I'll fix this up for F20 in the near 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=tRxLlwWxOUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 958131] Review Request: mysql-community - rename community-mysql to mysql-community
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958131 --- Comment #7 from Honza Horak hho...@redhat.com --- I've looked at the updated package and it looks fine for me, except the renaming as already mentioned above. So I'm fine with rebasing community-mysql to 5.6.13 for F21, which I'm going to do till the end of this week. However, the devel freeze for F20 was already 20th August, so I'd rather go with F21 only. If you think we should update to 5.6 in F20 as well, I'd like to hear what community on fedora-devel says, since upgrading to 5.6 is still very large leap, so I'd rather not hurry. About sponsorship, I'm not a sponsor, so I can't sponsor you to have full package maintainer account. What I could do is to offer mentoring as per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Become_a_co-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=EQe52a6xMqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 752223] Review Request: racoon2 - an implementation of key management system for IPsec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=752223 Matěj Cepl mc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(mc...@redhat.com) --- Comment #55 from Matěj Cepl mc...@redhat.com --- What about closing this bug when all packages are in stable for a long time? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mYpsjYwFssa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 946862] Review Request: rubygem-git-up - git command to fetch and rebase all branches
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946862 Jan Včelák jv+fed...@fcelda.cz changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Flags|needinfo?(jv+fedora@fcelda. | |cz) | --- Comment #2 from Jan Včelák jv+fed...@fcelda.cz --- I will update the package in a few moments. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zKa7hHKM8Pa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 752223] Review Request: racoon2 - an implementation of key management system for IPsec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=752223 Matěj Cepl mc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(mc...@redhat.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RIf8f0Zyi7a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1006295] Review Request: libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment - a network equipment shape gallery for LibreOffice
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006295 Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anto.tra...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com --- Hi David. I propose to you another review swap. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=996222 What do you say ? :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ea56yzw6MMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 752223] Review Request: racoon2 - an implementation of key management system for IPsec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=752223 Matěj Cepl mc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Flags|needinfo?(mc...@redhat.com) | |needinfo?(mc...@redhat.com) | Last Closed||2013-09-11 17:27:54 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IcwSUPb5ppa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1007099] New: Review Request: ardour3 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007099 Bug ID: 1007099 Summary: Review Request: ardour3 - Digital Audio Workstation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nphil...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/ardour3/ardour3.spec SRPM URL: http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/ardour3/ardour3-3.4-0.1.fc19.src.rpm Description: Ardour is a multi-channel digital audio workstation, allowing users to record, edit, mix and master audio and MIDI projects. It is targeted at audio engineers, musicians, soundtrack editors and composers. Fedora Account System Username: nphilipp NB: this is version 3.x of the existing ardour package and supposed to be installable in parallel. We'll keep the old version around because while the new version can open ardour 2.x projects, some information may be lost during import and people should be able to edit their old projects without running afoul of this. Users should use the current version 3.x for new projects. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=KuYRi7jTr7a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1007099] Review Request: ardour3 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007099 Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hdego...@redhat.com, ||nphil...@redhat.com, ||oget.fed...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com --- NB^2: I'll keep the release number as 0.x during the review and will bump it to 1 during import after the review is finished. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=j8wtIanDUZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1007099] Review Request: ardour3 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007099 Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||929044 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hsdTgxVzEBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 990272] Review Request: libmbim - library to control MBIM-speaking WWAN modems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=990272 Dan Williams d...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Dan Williams d...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: libmbim Short Description: Support library for the Mobile Broadband Interface Model protocol Owners: dcbw Branches: f20+ 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=emLw8cwFtra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895073] Review Request: dnscrypt - Tool for securing communications between a client and a DNS resolver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895073 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||NotReady --- Comment #8 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Added NotReady. When libevent 2.1 released, please clean the WhiteBoard and lift needinfo on me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LcswdMe9kra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 989068] Review Request: google-api-python-client - Google APIs Client Library for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=989068 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Ah really sorry, forgot to do this. Please update to 1.2 first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=utyhXWlOICa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 981707] Review Request: bmon - bandwidth monitor and rate estimator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=981707 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(tg...@redhat.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IYvUO5dzWka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 924675] Review Request: epoptes - Computer lab management tool for LTSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924675 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(enslaver@enslaver ||.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=AQ7MUgnoXPa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 989069] Review Request: python-uri-templates - A Python implementation of URI Template
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=989069 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(sanjay.ankur@gmai ||l.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=znaTdFK9PFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948359] Review Request: python-volatility - a digital artifact extraction framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948359 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Flags||needinfo?(al...@redhat.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rf7L4MVSSOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 991294] Review Request: python-appdirs - A small Python module for determining appropriate platform-specific dirs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=991294
--- Comment #5 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com ---
READ IT CAREFULLY.
1. python-appdirs.src:5: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 5, tab:
line 4)
2. python-appdirs.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/appdirs.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
Requires
python-appdirs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/usr/bin/env
python(abi)
3. Just got new revised guidelines from FPC, all python2.x stuffs should be
renamed to python2 related.
So:
- %{__python} -- %{__python2}
- %{python_sitelib} -- %{python2_sitelib}
4. %{__python} %{_builddir}/%{pkgname}-%{commit}/test/test.py
Just use %{__python} test/test.py is enough.
5. MUSTN'T leave macro in %changelog section:
* Fri Aug 2 2013 Marcelo Barbosa mr.marcelo.barb...@gmail.com - 1.2.0-2
- Remove %clean
- Remove egg-dir in %prep
Please double %% them.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3z3zSFvdala=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1007152] New: Review Request: ghc-vector-binary-instances - Binary and Serialize instances for vector
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007152 Bug ID: 1007152 Summary: Review Request: ghc-vector-binary-instances - Binary and Serialize instances for vector Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: peter...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org//ghc-vector-binary-instances.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org//ghc-vector-binary-instances-0.2.1.0-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: Instances for Binary for the types defined in the vector package, making it easy to serialize vectors to and from disk. We use the generic interface to vectors, so all vector types are supported. Specific instances are provided for unboxed, boxed and storable vectors. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=sBEN7JsnPva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1007152] Review Request: ghc-vector-binary-instances - Binary and Serialize instances for vector
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007152 --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5925720 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=t1mQFhwFIKa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1007152] Review Request: ghc-vector-binary-instances - Binary and Serialize instances for vector
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007152 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||haskell-devel@lists.fedorap ||roject.org Blocks||999011 Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rel...@redhat.com Whiteboard||Ready -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=XwniEYKiLSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 911932] Review Request: bccc - The buddycloud console client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911932 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- 1. Which is the real upstream? https://github.com/Schnouki/bccc https://github.com/buddycloud/bccc 2. Seems no LICENSE file? You should ask upstream to add one. Package is good, just waiting for your answers. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=i9YsNLfJXya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 958131] Review Request: mysql-community - rename community-mysql to mysql-community
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958131 Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Honza Horak from comment #7) About sponsorship, I'm not a sponsor, so I can't sponsor you to have full package maintainer account. What I could do is to offer mentoring as per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Become_a_co-maintainer Honza, if you wouldn't mind I can take this review over, finish it and sponsor Bjorn into packager-group. After this you can step in as a mentor and help him improve his skills / knowledge. ;) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=KSqTKfsaL9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
