[Bug 1011041] Review Request: python3-py3dns - Python3 DNS library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011041 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2013-11-09 02:57:19 --- Comment #9 from Christopher Meng --- Hmm...not sure why I didn't understand in comment 4, I will keep clearheaded from now on... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1005405] Review Request: python-thrift - Thrift Python Software Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005405 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng --- ping! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1005406] Review Request: python-happybase - Python library to interact with Apache HBase
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005406 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng --- ping! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1019403] Review Request: gst-editing-services - Gstreamer editing services
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019403 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng --- Hello Aidan, I can't reproduce the case you mentioned above on rawhide machine, but I think I found these are related: checking for gobject-introspection... no checking for gtkdoc-check... no checking for gtkdoc-rebase... no checking for gtkdoc-mkpdf... no checking whether to build gtk-doc documentation... no And Jon, the build process is not expanded so please add V=1 to make. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607873] Review Request: OTRS - Open Source Ticket Request System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607873 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cicku...@gmail.com --- Comment #13 from Christopher Meng --- I intend to package it again for all Fedora branches in recent weeks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ 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 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng --- ping. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027594] Review Request: perl-IO-SessionData - IO::SessionData and IO::SessionSet modules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027594 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng --- PACKAGE APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- python-couchdbkit-0.6.5-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-couchdbkit-0.6.5-2.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- python-couchdbkit-0.6.5-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-couchdbkit-0.6.5-2.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- lttv-1.5-4.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lttv-1.5-4.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |MODIFIED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |--- Keywords||Reopened -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- lttv-1.5-4.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lttv-1.5-4.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 632853] Review Request: pptpd - PoPToP Point to Point Tunneling Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=632853 --- Comment #38 from Mathieu Bridon --- Thanks Rex, I had missed this part of the guidelines. :) Thanks for the review, Tom. The pppd.h file is indeed not in the pptpd package any more, as Jaroslav unbundled it (and that made it to the latest upstream release). Jaroslav, can you fix the license tag as Tom indicated? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975316] Review Request: libodb-qt - Qt ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975316 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|libodb-qt-2.2.1-1.fc18 |libodb-qt-2.2.1-1.fc19 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-qt-2.2.1-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975316] Review Request: libodb-qt - Qt ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975316 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||libodb-qt-2.2.1-1.fc18 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:36:43 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-qt-2.2.1-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975317] Review Request: libodb-pgsql - PostgreSQL ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975317 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|libodb-pgsql-2.2.0-1.fc19 |libodb-pgsql-2.2.0-1.fc18 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-pgsql-2.2.0-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1003280] Review Request: postscriptbarcode - Barcode Writer in Pure PostScript
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1003280 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||postscriptbarcode-20131006- ||2.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:34:09 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- postscriptbarcode-20131006-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1001799] Review Request: kbarcode - A barcode and label printing application for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001799 Bug 1001799 depends on bug 1003280, which changed state. Bug 1003280 Summary: Review Request: postscriptbarcode - Barcode Writer in Pure PostScript https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1003280 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 985065] Review Request: peg-solitaire - Board game played with pegs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=985065 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||peg-solitaire-2.0-4.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:33:44 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- peg-solitaire-2.0-4.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975318] Review Request: libodb-sqlite - SQLite ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975318 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|libodb-sqlite-2.2.3-1.fc18 |libodb-sqlite-2.2.3-1.fc19 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-sqlite-2.2.3-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975318] Review Request: libodb-sqlite - SQLite ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975318 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||libodb-sqlite-2.2.3-1.fc18 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:32:35 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-sqlite-2.2.3-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975315] Review Request: libodb-mysql - MySQL ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975315 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|libodb-mysql-2.2.0-1.fc18 |libodb-mysql-2.2.0-1.fc19 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-mysql-2.2.0-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024913] Review Request: perl-Types-Serialiser - Simple data types for common serialization formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024913 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Types-Serialiser-0.03-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975315] Review Request: libodb-mysql - MySQL ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975315 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||libodb-mysql-2.2.0-1.fc18 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:31:38 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-mysql-2.2.0-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 958533] Review Request: android-json-org-java - Androids rewrite of the evil licensed Json.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958533 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||android-json-org-java-4.3-0 ||.1.r3.1.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:31:21 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- android-json-org-java-4.3-0.1.r3.1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 837450] Review Request: android - Google Android Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=837450 Bug 837450 depends on bug 958533, which changed state. Bug 958533 Summary: Review Request: android-json-org-java - Androids rewrite of the evil licensed Json.org https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958533 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975313] Review Request: libodb-boost - Boost ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975313 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|libodb-boost-2.2.1-1.fc19 |libodb-boost-2.2.1-1.fc18 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-boost-2.2.1-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1023671] Review Request: knapsen - Schnapsen card game for KDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023671 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||knapsen-1.0.0-1.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:31:03 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- knapsen-1.0.0-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975317] Review Request: libodb-pgsql - PostgreSQL ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975317 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||libodb-pgsql-2.2.0-1.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:29:29 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-pgsql-2.2.0-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975313] Review Request: libodb-boost - Boost ODB runtime library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975313 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||libodb-boost-2.2.1-1.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:29:19 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- libodb-boost-2.2.1-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024913] Review Request: perl-Types-Serialiser - Simple data types for common serialization formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024913 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Types-Serialiser-0.03-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 954074] Review Request: RemoteBox - Open Source VirtualBox Client with Remote Management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=954074 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||RemoteBox-1.6-2.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-11-08 22:29:01 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- RemoteBox-1.6-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014385] Review Request: openid-selector - A user-friendly way to select an OpenID
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014385 --- Comment #7 from Ken Dreyer --- *** Bug 1014382 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014382] Review Request: openid-selector - A user-friendly way to select an OpenID
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014382 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Flags|fedora-review? | Last Closed||2013-11-08 19:52:59 --- Comment #1 from Ken Dreyer --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1014385 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014382] Review Request: openid-selector - A user-friendly way to select an OpenID
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014382 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ktdre...@ktdreyer.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ktdre...@ktdreyer.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1028642] Review Request: rubygem-middleware - Generalized implementation of the middleware abstraction for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028642 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1027407 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 [Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1028642 --- Comment #7 from Ken Dreyer --- I just realized that this package requires rubygem-middleware, which is not yet in Fedora. Review request at bug 1028642. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028642 [Bug 1028642] Review Request: rubygem-middleware - Generalized implementation of the middleware abstraction for Ruby -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1028642] New: Review Request: rubygem-middleware - Generalized implementation of the middleware abstraction for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028642 Bug ID: 1028642 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-middleware - Generalized implementation of the middleware abstraction for Ruby Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ktdre...@ktdreyer.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-middleware.spec SRPM URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-middleware-0.1.0-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Generalized implementation of the middleware abstraction for Ruby. Fedora Account System Username: ktdreyer F21 scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6156941 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 Suchakra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2013-11-08 19:06:09 --- Comment #19 from Suchakra --- Thanks everyone. Closing this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ 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 #5 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Pushed dep to stable. Will update this asap. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ 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 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(sanjay.ankur@gmai | |l.com) | --- Comment #9 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- What info are you looking for Christopher? It's generally a good idea to accompany the needinfo with a comment :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- rubygem-thinking-sphinx-3.0.6-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-thinking-sphinx-3.0.6-2.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- rubygem-thinking-sphinx-3.0.6-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-thinking-sphinx-3.0.6-2.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026052] Review Request: rubygem-github-markdown - rubygem to process github markdown
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026052 Axilleas Pipinellis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||axill...@archlinux.gr --- Comment #5 from Axilleas Pipinellis --- Hey Keiran, you can check how I've done it for Fedora 19+ here [0]. And guys, remember that the LICENSE is not shipped with this gem. I haven't found the source code on github so as to open an issue. Also, the current version is 0.6.3. [0] https://github.com/axilleas/fedora/blob/master/packages/SPECS/rubygem-github-markdown.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 986051] Review Request: dtv-scan-tables - Digital TV scan tables
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=986051 --- Comment #8 from Till Maas --- (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #7) > Please add the full release number to %changelog: > > * Fri Nov 01 2013 Till Maas - 0-2.20130703gitd913405 Is this really necessary and is there a way to do this with vim without having to write the date and git hash manually several times in the SPEC? The first digit is already unique for each version, therefore 0-2 will always identifiy the release. I do not see an easy way to change the macros to e.g. only write the date and git hash in the Release tag and then build the source tag from it, which would allow to write the full release to the changelog with \c. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016770] Review Request: nodejs-nan - Native Abstractions for Node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016770 Troy Dawson changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(tdaw...@redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #5 from Troy Dawson --- Spec URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/nodejs/nodejs-nan.spec SRPM URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/nodejs/nodejs-nan-0.4.4-1.fc20.src.rpm - Updated to latest release: nan 0.4.4 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 Suchakra changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 --- Comment #17 from Suchakra --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: lttv Short Description: Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer Owners: suchakra greenscientist Branches: f19 f20 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 986051] Review Request: dtv-scan-tables - Digital TV scan tables
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=986051 Mario Blättermann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from Mario Blättermann --- Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6156289 $ rpmlint -i -v *dtv-scan-tables.src: I: checking dtv-scan-tables.src: I: checking-url http://git.linuxtv.org/dtv-scan-tables.git (timeout 10 seconds) dtv-scan-tables.src: I: checking-url http://linuxtv.org/downloads/dtv-scan-tables/dtv-scan-tables-2013-07-03-d913405.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) dtv-scan-tables.noarch: I: checking dtv-scan-tables.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0-2 ['0-2.20130703gitd913405.fc21', '0-2.20130703gitd913405'] The latest entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. dtv-scan-tables.noarch: I: checking-url http://git.linuxtv.org/dtv-scan-tables.git (timeout 10 seconds) dtv-scan-tables.spec: I: checking-url http://linuxtv.org/downloads/dtv-scan-tables/dtv-scan-tables-2013-07-03-d913405.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Please add the full release number to %changelog: * Fri Nov 01 2013 Till Maas - 0-2.20130703gitd913405 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Ken Dreyer --- Thank you very much for the review! I've escaped the macro in the comments per your suggestion. http://fedorapeople.org/cgit/ktdreyer/public_git/rubygem-thinking-sphinx.git/commit/?id=f795480c533ac124747ab55136c09cfd3bfdda57 New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-thinking-sphinx Short Description: A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord Owners: ktdreyer Branches: f19 f20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027506] Review Request: python-proboscis - A test framework that extends Python's built-in unit test
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027506 Daniel Bruno changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |python-proboscis - |python-proboscis - A test |Proboscis is a Python test |framework that extends |framework that extends |Python's built-in unit test |Python's built-in unit test | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739263] Review Request: sugar-bounce - Fast paced 3D action game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739263 Mario Blättermann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2013-11-08 14:34:21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #16 from Orion Poplawski --- Looks good. Approved. Welcome aboard! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 632853] Review Request: pptpd - PoPToP Point to Point Tunneling Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=632853 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal) | --- Comment #37 from Tom "spot" Callaway --- (In reply to Mathieu Bridon from comment #35) > Copy-pasting my licensing doubts in this comment, to make it easier for the > legal folks to review. > > Note that the ppp header has been unbundled. > > [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > > The following files are GPLv2+: > > - bcrelay.c > - plugins/pptpd-logwtmp.c > - tools/vpnstats.pl > > The following files are under the LGPLv2+ license. (they are copied from > the glibc) > > - getopt1.c > - getopt.c > - our_getopt.h > > The following files are under a BSD that I've never seen before, and > isn't > even in the wiki page: > > - plugins/pppd.h I don't actually see this file in the pptpd package, but I looked at the one in the ppp-devel package and it is a variant of the "BSD with Attribution" license, so just add that to the License tag if it is actually in the pptpd package. > The following files are said to be copied from RFC 1662: > > - ppphdlc.c > - ppphdlc.h These are clearly derived from the pptpclient source by C. S. Ananian, which is GPLv2+, so these files can be considered to be under that license as well. Assuming that the pppd.h file isn't in pptpd, the license tag should be: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ Lifting FE-Legal. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 --- Comment #15 from Suchakra --- > /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3DCPk9: line 40: desktop-file-install: command not found > > You need a BR on desktop-file-utils. Please test builds in mock first. Changes made. Mock and koji used to test builds : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6155876 All seems ok to me. Updated the new spec and SRPM based on Comment 14 : Spec URL: http://suchakra.fedorapeople.org/packages/lttv.spec SRPM URL: http://suchakra.fedorapeople.org/packages/lttv-1.5-4.fc19.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1025601] Review Request: python-pypump - Python Pump.io library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025601 Mario Blättermann changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m --- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann --- (In reply to Mosaab Alzoubi from comment #1) > * License GPLv3 Have a look at this: $ licensecheck -r * docs/conf.py: GENERATED FILE docs/examples/pypump-post-note.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN pypump/exception/PumpException.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN pypump/exception/DoesNotExist.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN pypump/exception/ImmutableException.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN pypump/exception/__init__.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN pypump/exception/ServerError.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN pypump/pypump.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/__init__.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN pypump/models/comment.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/image.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/activity.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/person.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/feed.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/__init__.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/location.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/collection.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/models/note.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/openid.py: GPL (v3 or later) pypump/compatability.py: GPL (v3 or later) setup.py: *No copyright* UNKNOWN Don't refer to the license file only. In doubt, have a look at the file headers to see if the "later versions" clause has to be applied. > * Using docs/ folder as documents in both python-pypump and python3-pypump > without making them ! Indeed, the docs contain the "docs" folder as it is. If you want to add those contents to the package, proceed the Makefile to get real content. > * Must use %__python2 macro instead of %__python. See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025368#c1. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 632853] Review Request: pptpd - PoPToP Point to Point Tunneling Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=632853 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Comment #36 from Rex Dieter --- about lacking headers, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ?rd=Licensing/FAQ#How_do_I_figure_out_what_version_of_the_GPL.2FLGPL_my_package_is_under.3F In short, 1. What does the code say? ... 3. What does the documentation say? ... If you get (here), you definitely want to let upstream know that you are unable to determine the applicable licensing (and/or license versioning) from the source and documentation. They'll almost certainly let you know what their intended license version is, and (hopefully) correct it in the upstream source. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1025110] Review Request: polari - Internet Relay Chat client for GNOME 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025110 Yanko Kaneti changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yan...@declera.com --- Comment #6 from Yanko Kaneti --- Some basic observations while trying to try this on rawhide. - You are patching *am, the tarball is disted with automake 1.13, rawhide has automake 1.14 -> you need to autoreconf -fi and BR: automake autoconf libtool - It wouldnt't work with the gjs in rawhide, so had to upgrade to a snapshot (polari:14085): Gjs-WARNING **: JS ERROR: [boxed instance proxy GIName:GLib.Error jsobj@0x7f0562c91df0 native@0x156f720] - It fails hard without telepathy-mission-control, perhaps it should Require: it (polari:27156): Gjs-WARNING **: JS ERROR: GLib.Error dbus-glib-error-quark: The name org.freedesktop.Telepathy.AccountManager was not provided by any .service files -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027407] Review Request: rubygem-thinking-sphinx - A smart wrapper over Sphinx for ActiveRecord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027407
Mario Blättermann 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 ---
$ rpmlint -i -v *rubygem-thinking-sphinx.noarch: I: checking
rubygem-thinking-sphinx.noarch: I: checking-url
http://pat.github.io/thinking-sphinx/ (timeout 10 seconds)
rubygem-thinking-sphinx.src: I: checking
rubygem-thinking-sphinx.src: I: checking-url
http://pat.github.io/thinking-sphinx/ (timeout 10 seconds)
rubygem-thinking-sphinx.src:94: W: macro-in-comment %{SOURCE1}
There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros
are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and
escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate.
rubygem-thinking-sphinx.src: I: checking-url
https://rubygems.org/gems/thinking-sphinx-3.0.6.gem (timeout 10 seconds)
rubygem-thinking-sphinx-doc.noarch: I: checking
rubygem-thinking-sphinx-doc.noarch: I: checking-url
http://pat.github.io/thinking-sphinx/ (timeout 10 seconds)
rubygem-thinking-sphinx.spec:94: W: macro-in-comment %{SOURCE1}
There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros
are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and
escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate.
rubygem-thinking-sphinx.spec: I: checking-url
https://rubygems.org/gems/thinking-sphinx-3.0.6.gem (timeout 10 seconds)
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
The macro-in-comment warning should be taken serious. It can cause some
unexpected behavior. Please escape the % in line 94 with a second one. Can be
done later.
-
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.
MIT
[+] 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 *
1b3ebead66c711802c91c8c70195207ae13e896344e3ae1c850f4df37c846224
thinking-sphinx-3.0.6.gem
1b3ebead66c711802c91c8c70195207ae13e896344e3ae1c850f4df37c846224
thinking-sphinx-3.0.6.gem.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 f
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Christopher Meng --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-couchdbkit Short Description: CouchDB framework in Python Owners: cicku Branches: f20 f19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 990725] Review Request: openstack-neutron - Rename of openstack-quantum package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=990725 Terry Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2013-11-08 13:04:10 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 990725] Review Request: openstack-neutron - Rename of openstack-quantum package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=990725 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- openstack-neutron-2013.2-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19509/openstack-neutron-2013.2-1.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 990725] Review Request: openstack-neutron - Rename of openstack-quantum package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=990725 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1021091] Review Request: dnsyo - Check DNS against many global DNS servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021091 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ON_QA Resolution|ERRATA |--- Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- Package dnsyo-1.1.4-2.el6: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=epel-testing dnsyo-1.1.4-2.el6' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-12059/dnsyo-1.1.4-2.el6 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011501] Review Request: qt5-qtaccountsservice - Qt5 - AccountService addon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011501 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- qt5-qtconfiguration-0.1.0-3.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qt5-qtconfiguration-0.1.0-3.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011501] Review Request: qt5-qtaccountsservice - Qt5 - AccountService addon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011501 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |MODIFIED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |--- Keywords||Reopened -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011500] Review Request: qt5-qtconfiguration - Qt5 - QtConfiguration module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011500 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2013-11-08 12:55:03 --- Comment #10 from Lubomir Rintel --- Imported and built. Thank you! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011501] Review Request: qt5-qtaccountsservice - Qt5 - AccountService addon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011501 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2013-11-08 12:54:57 --- Comment #15 from Lubomir Rintel --- Imported and built. Thank you! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669
Mario Blättermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann ---
New scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6155716
$ rpmlint -i -v *python-couchdbkit.noarch: I: checking
python-couchdbkit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dicts ->
ducts, dicta, dict
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-couchdbkit.noarch: I: checking-url http://couchdbkit.org (timeout 10
seconds)
python-couchdbkit.src: I: checking
python-couchdbkit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dicts -> ducts,
dicta, dict
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-couchdbkit.src: I: checking-url http://couchdbkit.org (timeout 10
seconds)
python-couchdbkit.src: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/c/couchdbkit/couchdbkit-0.6.5.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
python-couchdbkit.spec: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/c/couchdbkit/couchdbkit-0.6.5.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Nothing of interest anymore.
-
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.
MIT
[+] 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 *
9b607f509727e6ada2dbd576a4120c214b1c54f3bb8bf6e2e0eb2cfbb11a0e00
couchdbkit-0.6.5.tar.gz
9b607f509727e6ada2dbd576a4120c214b1c54f3bb8bf6e2e0eb2cfbb11a0e00
couchdbkit-0.6.5.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 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 specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the
[Bug 1028521] Review Request: perl-DBD-ODBC - ODBC Driver for DBI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028521 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng --- (In reply to Jan Holcapek from comment #3) > (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #2) > > SPEC URL is not the same one in SRPM. Dunno why you used a repoforge SPEC > > link. > > My bad: > https://github.com/holcapek/perl-DBD-ODBC/raw/master/perl-DBD-ODBC.spec > > > I've committed some small changes on your github link, please check. > > > > https://github.com/holcapek/perl-DBD-ODBC/pull/1 > > As far as I can tell, that looks good. I'm just wondering why did you remove > all the perl module versions in (Build)Requires? Because the versions are too old, even RHEL5(the oldest product still in support period) has newer version of them. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1027506] Review Request: python-proboscis - Proboscis is a Python test framework that extends Python's built-in unit test
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027506 --- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann --- (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #1) > The summary shouldn't repeat the package name, and Python itself doesn't > need to be mentioned twice. My proposal: > "A test framework that extends Python's built-in unit test" Please change the summary (don't forget to edit the bug description in this review ticket), and your package is ready for approval. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013095] Review Request: cube - CUBE Uniform Behavioral Encoding generic presentation component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013095 --- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski --- * Fri Nov 8 2013 Orion Poplawski - 4.2-3 - Fix 32bit build Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/cube.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/cube-4.2-3.fc19.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011501] Review Request: qt5-qtaccountsservice - Qt5 - AccountService addon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011501 --- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 902006] Review Request: pylibpcap - A Python module for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902006 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011501] Review Request: qt5-qtaccountsservice - Qt5 - AccountService addon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011501 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011500] Review Request: qt5-qtconfiguration - Qt5 - QtConfiguration module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011500 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011500] Review Request: qt5-qtconfiguration - Qt5 - QtConfiguration module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011500 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 902006] Review Request: pylibpcap - A Python module for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902006 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 902006] Review Request: pylibpcap - A Python module for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902006 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pylibpcap Short Description: A Python module for libpcap Owners: fab Branches: f19 f20 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1028521] Review Request: perl-DBD-ODBC - ODBC Driver for DBI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028521 --- Comment #3 from Jan Holcapek --- (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #2) > SPEC URL is not the same one in SRPM. Dunno why you used a repoforge SPEC > link. My bad: https://github.com/holcapek/perl-DBD-ODBC/raw/master/perl-DBD-ODBC.spec > I've committed some small changes on your github link, please check. > > https://github.com/holcapek/perl-DBD-ODBC/pull/1 As far as I can tell, that looks good. I'm just wondering why did you remove all the perl module versions in (Build)Requires? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 902006] Review Request: pylibpcap - A Python module for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902006 --- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter --- Thanks for the review, Michael. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1028521] Review Request: perl-DBD-ODBC - ODBC Driver for DBI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028521 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cicku...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng --- SPEC URL is not the same one in SRPM. Dunno why you used a repoforge SPEC link. I've committed some small changes on your github link, please check. https://github.com/holcapek/perl-DBD-ODBC/pull/1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1004565] Review Request: eureka - A cross-platform map editor for the classic DOOM games
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1004565
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cicku...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #14 from Christopher Meng ---
Take again.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/rpmaker/Desktop/eureka/licensecheck.txt
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: 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.
[x]: 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 5 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: 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:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has
[Bug 1028521] Review Request: perl-DBD-ODBC - ODBC Driver for DBI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028521 Jan Holcapek changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) --- Comment #1 from Jan Holcapek --- Perhaps this will go smoother than https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441830 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011501] Review Request: qt5-qtaccountsservice - Qt5 - AccountService addon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011501 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Lubomir Rintel --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: qt5-qtaccountsservice Short Description: Qt5 - AccountService addon Owners: lkundrak cicku rdieter than jreznik kkofler ltinkl rnovacek Branches: f18 f19 f20 el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024127] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024127 --- Comment #14 from Orion Poplawski --- mock build fails: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3DCPk9: line 40: desktop-file-install: command not found You need a BR on desktop-file-utils. Please test builds in mock first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1028521] New: Review Request: perl-DBD-ODBC - ODBC Driver for DBI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028521 Bug ID: 1028521 Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-ODBC - ODBC Driver for DBI Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: holca...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org spec https://github.com/repoforge/rpms/raw/master/specs/perl-DBD-ODBC/perl-DBD-ODBC.spec srpm https://github.com/holcapek/perl-DBD-ODBC/raw/master/perl-DBD-ODBC-1.45-1.fc19.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011500] Review Request: qt5-qtconfiguration - Qt5 - QtConfiguration module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011500 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Lubomir Rintel --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: qt5-qtconfiguration Short Description: Qt5 - QtConfiguration module Owners: lkundrak cicku rdieter than jreznik kkofler ltinkl rnovacek Branches: f18 f19 f20 el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1025110] Review Request: polari - Internet Relay Chat client for GNOME 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025110 --- Comment #5 from Andrea Veri --- I'll make sure this is done within the upcoming weekend. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1013669] Review Request: python-couchdbkit - CouchDB framework in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013669 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng --- Updated. URLs are the same in comment 2. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1024885] Review Request: python-openstackclient - OpenStack Command-line Client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024885
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Ruzicka ---
It doesn't work without pbr out of the box.
pbr stands for Python Build Reasonableness. Aside from not being resonable, it
includes the versioning functionality which is used runtime. I believe this was
to be moved to oslo.version but it haven't yet so I patch all the clients to
provide version from .spec file to prevent runtime dep on pbr.
The dependency handling functionality is also unwanted because deps are (and
should be) handled by package manager. That's why I remove
{test,}requirements.txt and "setup_requires=['pbr']" from setup.py as well.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 751119] Review Request: perl-Judy - Perl wrapper for Judy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751119
--- Comment #8 from Jan Holcapek ---
My apologies for being that late.
Required items were mostly fixed by exploiting cpanspec to generate spec file
from CPAN module. The only piece I had to change was source tarball url:
generated one was invalid, so I picked working one.
> I guess I could sponsor you. I'd like to see some more packages from you
> first, though...
perl-DBD-ODBC will come soon.
> FIX: The package doesn't build (tested in Rawhide) due to missing build-time
> dependencies. The following should be added:
> perl(constant), perl(Sub::Exporter)
Fixed.
> FIX: I don't see a reason for those custom macros -- could you explain them?
> Anyway, use %global instead of %define to comply with the Guidelines.
Fixed.
> FIX: Remove './Build test' from %build and move it to a (not currently
> present) %check section
Fixed.
> FIX: Remove gcc from build-time dependencies. This is always present.
Fixed.
> FIX: Remove all those useless explicit Provides.
Well, I'd love to, yet if I do so, I end up with these errors when about to
install the resulting package:
--cut--
[root@localhost perl-Judy]# rpm -U --test
../rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
perl(Judy::1::_impl) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::1::_obj) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::1::_tie) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::HS::_impl) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::HS::_obj) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::HS::_tie) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::L::_impl) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::L::_obj) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::L::_tie) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::Mem::_impl) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::SL::_dump) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::SL::_impl) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::SL::_obj) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::SL::_tie) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
perl(Judy::_tie) is needed by perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.x86_64
--cut--
I just don't know how to get rid of them except specifying explicit Provides.
Any idea?
> TODO: Improve the %description; this is just a copy of Summary and doesn't
> really say much about the package.
Fixed.
> TODO: Unless you plan this for EPEL, remove the %clean section.
I would actually like to push the package to EPEL eventually, so leaving %clean
in place.
> TODO: Unless you plan this for EPEL5 or older, drop the buildroot removal
> from %install. If you do, add %defattr to %files and specify the Buildroot
> tag.
Fixed: don't plan for EPEL5, thus removed buildroot removal from %install.
> TODO: Don't list manpages in %doc. They're marked as documentation
> automatically. Also substitute the gzip extension with a glob; the
> compression might change in the future. Be ready.
Fixed by using cpanspec.
> FIX: Don't use paths in %doc; simple '%doc Changes README' would do the
> right thing (TM).
Fixed.
> FIX: Simply put: Use Module::Build as other packages do. You don't need
> anything extra. E.g.:
>
> %build
> perl Build.PL installdirs=vendor
> ./Build
>
> %install
> ./Build install destdir=%{buildroot} create_packlist=0
> find %{buildroot} -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2>/dev/null \;
> %{_fixperms} %{buildroot}/*
>
> %check
> ./Build test
Hopefully fixed, I trusted cpanspec to do the right thing.
> TIP: Simplify the %files list by using globs.
Fixed.
> FIX: Your Version is missing the %dist-tag. Add it.
Fixed.
> TIP: What's the reason for the patch? Explain it in a comment.
As the patch name suggests, it attempts to avoid using Alien::Judy module,
which serves the only purpose of looking up Judy headers in build time, and
Judy shared library in runtime. Since Judy-devel package delivers header into
standard location, and Judy package does so for shared library, there's no need
for this extra tooling.
--
Also, I have updated the spec with the latest upstream version 0.41:
https://github.com/holcapek/perl-Judy/raw/master/perl-Judy.spec
https://github.com/holcapek/perl-Judy/raw/master/perl-Judy-0.41-1.fc19.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
