[Bug 1049207] Review Request: ghc-regex-posix - Haskell posix regex library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1049207 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2014-01-24 03:10:02 -- 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 1047746] Review Request: ghc-html - HTML combinator library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047746 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-01-24 03:11:16 -- 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 1047804] Review Request: ghc-regex-base - Haskell regex base library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047804 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-01-24 03:11:07 -- 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 1049557] Review Request: jpeginfo - Utility to obtain information from JPEG files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1049557 Denis Fateyev de...@fateyev.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Denis Fateyev de...@fateyev.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jpeginfo Short Description: Error-check and generate informative listings from JPEG files Owners: dfateyev Branches: f19 f20 el5 el6 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 1057496] New: Review Request: senna - An embeddable fulltext search engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057496 Bug ID: 1057496 Summary: Review Request: senna - An embeddable fulltext search engine 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: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://cicku.me/senna.spec SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/senna-1.1.5-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Senna is an embeddable fulltext search engine which you can use in conjunction with various scripting languages and databases. Senna is an inverted index based engine, and combines the best of n-gram indexing and word indexing to achieve fast, precise searches. While senna codebase is rather compact it is scalable enough to handle large amounts of data and queries. Fedora Account System Username: cicku -- 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 1009842] Rename Request: ghc-highlighting-kate - Sourcecode syntax highlighting
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1009842 --- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- 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 1057567] New: Review Request: ocltoys - Collection of OpenCL examples focused on Computer Graphics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057567 Bug ID: 1057567 Summary: Review Request: ocltoys - Collection of OpenCL examples focused on Computer Graphics Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/ocltoys.spec SRPM URL: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/ocltoys-1.0-4.c1d9aa1798be.fc21.src.rpm Description: Collection of OpenCL examples focused on Computer Graphics Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain -- 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 330951] Review Request: nbd - Network Block Device
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=330951 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- 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 330951] Review Request: nbd - Network Block Device
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=330951 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 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 512497] Review Request: bleachbit - Remove unnecessary files, free space, and maintain privacy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=512497 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- 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 512497] Review Request: bleachbit - Remove unnecessary files, free space, and maintain privacy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=512497 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 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 528847] Review Request: Netpipe - A protocol independent network performance tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528847 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 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 528847] Review Request: Netpipe - A protocol independent network performance tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528847 --- Comment #23 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- 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 979665] Review Request: perl-Data-MessagePack - MessagePack serialising/deserialising
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979665 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 979665] Review Request: perl-Data-MessagePack - MessagePack serialising/deserialising
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979665 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1047612] Review Request: php-phpseclib-net-sftp - Pure-PHP implementation of SFTP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047612 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1049557] Review Request: jpeginfo - Utility to obtain information from JPEG files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1049557 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1055393] Review Request: ocaml-biniou - Safe and fast binary data format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055393 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1049557] Review Request: jpeginfo - Utility to obtain information from JPEG files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1049557 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1047612] Review Request: php-phpseclib-net-sftp - Pure-PHP implementation of SFTP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047612 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1055393] Review Request: ocaml-biniou - Safe and fast binary data format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055393 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1056865] Review Request: libnftnl - Library for low-level interaction with nftables Netlink's API over libmnl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1056865 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1056865] Review Request: libnftnl - Library for low-level interaction with nftables Netlink's API over libmnl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1056865 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1055721] Review Request: qpid-dispatch - Dispatch router for Qpid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055721 Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #5) PACKAGE APPROVED! Excellent! Thank you. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: qpid-dispatch Short Description: Dispatch router for AMQP 1.0. Owners: mcpierce Branches: f19 f20 el5 el6 el7 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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901
Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
* Don't introduce additional requires
- Upstream does not like them
- They are useless, probably except tests with Ruby 1.8.7
* Mark the license by %doc macro
- Please mark the %{gem_instdir}/MIT-LICENSE as a documentation.
* rpmlint
- rpmlint complains about wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding a lot. This
might be
better to check with upstream.
- rubygem-rgen-doc.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/gems/gems/rgen-
0.6.6/test/testmodel/ea_testmodel.xml error seems to be false
positive,
since the XML explicitly says it is windows-1252 encoded. Probably
nothing
we can do about it.
I'll start working with the upstream to fix this.
Interesting, now I cannot reproduce these issues. Rpmlint now complains just
about CHANGELOG. This is probably updated file utility.
Nevertheless, is there any upstream ticket for this?
Otherwise, the package looks ok = APPROVED. Please fix the minor nits I have
mentioned above prior importing.
--
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 1057617] New: Review Request: python-django-haystack - Pluggable search for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057617 Bug ID: 1057617 Summary: Review Request: python-django-haystack - Pluggable search for Django Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sgall...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/coprs/reviewboard2/python-django-haystack.spec SRPM URL: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/coprs/reviewboard2/python-django-haystack-2.1.0-3.fc20.src.rpm Description: Haystack provides modular search for Django. It features a unified, familiar API that allows you to plug in different search backends (such as Solr, Elasticsearch, Whoosh, Xapian, etc.) without having to modify your code. Haystack is BSD licensed, plays nicely with third-party app without needing to modify the source and supports advanced features like faceting, More Like This, highlighting, spatial search and spelling suggestions. You can find more information at http://haystacksearch.org/. Fedora Account System Username: sgallagh -- 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 1057617] Review Request: python-django-haystack - Pluggable search for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057617 --- Comment #1 from Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com --- Koji Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6449048 -- 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 1055721] Review Request: qpid-dispatch - Dispatch router for Qpid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055721 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1055721] Review Request: qpid-dispatch - Dispatch router for Qpid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055721 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1057620] New: Review Request: python-whoosh - A library for indexing and searching text
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057620 Bug ID: 1057620 Summary: Review Request: python-whoosh - A library for indexing and searching text Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sgall...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/coprs/reviewboard2/python-whoosh.spec SRPM URL: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/coprs/reviewboard2/python-whoosh-2.5.6-2.fc20.src.rpm Description: Whoosh is a library of classes and functions for indexing text and then searching the index. It allows you to develop custom search engines for your content. For example, if you were creating blogging software, you could use Whoosh to add a search function to allow users to search blog entries. Fedora Account System Username: sgallagh Koji Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6449080 -- 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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901
--- Comment #8 from Sam Kottler skott...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #7)
* Don't introduce additional requires
- Upstream does not like them
- They are useless, probably except tests with Ruby 1.8.7
I just changed it to use RUBYOPTS to load rubygems before running the test
suite.
* Mark the license by %doc macro
- Please mark the %{gem_instdir}/MIT-LICENSE as a documentation.
* rpmlint
- rpmlint complains about wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding a lot. This
might be
better to check with upstream.
- rubygem-rgen-doc.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/gems/gems/rgen-
0.6.6/test/testmodel/ea_testmodel.xml error seems to be false
positive,
since the XML explicitly says it is windows-1252 encoded. Probably
nothing
we can do about it.
I'll start working with the upstream to fix this.
Interesting, now I cannot reproduce these issues. Rpmlint now complains just
about CHANGELOG. This is probably updated file utility.
Nevertheless, is there any upstream ticket for this?
Not yet, I'll create one today. I haven't actually tried to reproduce it, but
will do that again to see if I can recreate what you've seen before filing the
ticket.
Otherwise, the package looks ok = APPROVED. Please fix the minor nits I
have mentioned above prior importing.
Thanks, Vit!
--
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 1057617] Review Request: python-django-haystack - Pluggable search for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057617 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|puiterw...@redhat.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 1057620] Review Request: python-whoosh - A library for indexing and searching text
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057620 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|puiterw...@redhat.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 225996] Merge Review: libdbi-drivers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225996 jpac...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||jpac...@redhat.com Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jpac...@redhat.com Last Closed||2014-01-24 08:55:22 --- Comment #1 from jpac...@redhat.com --- As this issue seems really old and libdbi-drivers are already packaged, checked and pretty stable, I'm closing this issue as currentrelease. -- 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 984605] Review Request: nwchem - Delivering High-Performance Computational Chemistry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984605 marcindulak marcin.du...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(Marcin.Dulak@gmai | |l.com) | --- Comment #17 from marcindulak marcin.du...@gmail.com --- I have been fighting with nwchem build system for the last couple of days, and at the end managed to replace all (i hope) nwchem compiler flags with %optflags (minus -Werror=format-security - some parts of GA do not compile with that flag on). See http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6429073 The resulting binaries fail with texas_init: alloc for texas mapping1 failed 911 for the following example, on Rawhide i686: source /etc/profile.d/nwchem.sh; module load mpi; mpiexec -np 2 `which nwchem_openmpi` nwchem.nw with the following nwchem.nw: geometry noautoz noautosym H 0.0 0.0 1.0 H 0.0 0.0 0.0 end basis spherical * library cc-pvdz end task dft energy This is also visible from all tests suspiciously failed in koji's build.log. There are ~1000 and ~4000 source files in nwchem compiled with debug and optimization flags, respectively, and the build time 2-3 hours. Therefore, in my opinion, we have to stick to the default nwchem flags. -- 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 880203] Review Request: rubygem-strong_parameters - Permitted and required parameters for Action Pack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880203 Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | -- 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 1057670] New: Review Request: jetty8 - jetty compatability package (libs only)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057670 Bug ID: 1057670 Summary: Review Request: jetty8 - jetty compatability package (libs only) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: pmack...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://pmackinn.fedorapeople.org/jetty8/jetty8.spec SRPM URL: http://pmackinn.fedorapeople.org/jetty8/jetty8-8.1.14-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: This is a compatibility package. It generates libraries only and lacks systemd support for a jetty 8 server (generally the embedded use case). It is runtime target compatible with Java 6. Fedora Account System Username: pmackinn -- 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 1057670] Review Request: jetty8 - jetty compatibility package (libs only)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057670 Pete MacKinnon pmack...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: jetty8 -|Review Request: jetty8 - |jetty compatability package |jetty compatibility package |(libs only) |(libs only) -- 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 1055500] Review Request: libgssh - Friendly GIO wrapper for libssh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055500
--- Comment #4 from Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= Issues =
* Package bundles libgsystem-local-alloc. Bundling exception required.
* Commented-out Requires: line should be removed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
LGPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address), Unknown or
generated. 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck
in /dev/shm/1055500-libgssh/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package 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]: 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 30720 bytes in 1 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]: 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]: 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.
[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.
[-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps
[Bug 1055500] Review Request: libgssh - Friendly GIO wrapper for libssh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055500 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||puiterw...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(puiterwijk@redhat ||.com) -- 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 782560] Review Request: rubygem-ruby-shadow - *nix Shadow Password Module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782560 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(moses@puppetlabs. ||com) --- Comment #39 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com --- Moses - 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 1057670] Review Request: jetty8 - jetty compatibility package (libs only)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057670 Matthew Farrellee m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@redhat.com Blocks||1010003 (bigdata-review) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1010003 [Bug 1010003] bigdata-sig review-tracker -- 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 1057670] Review Request: jetty8 - jetty compatibility package (libs only)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057670 Pete MacKinnon pmack...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|wi...@redhat.com -- 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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901 Sam Kottler skott...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Sam Kottler skott...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-rgen Short Description: Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework Owners: skottler Branches: f20 f19 el6 epel7 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 1020942] Package Request: wxGTK3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020942 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||or...@cora.nwra.com --- Comment #14 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz --- *** Bug 1057696 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 1055721] Review Request: qpid-dispatch - Dispatch router for Qpid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055721 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1055721] Review Request: qpid-dispatch - Dispatch router for Qpid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055721 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- qpid-dispatch-0.1-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qpid-dispatch-0.1-2.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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 984605] Review Request: nwchem - Delivering High-Performance Computational Chemistry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984605 --- Comment #18 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com --- (In reply to marcindulak from comment #17) This is also visible from all tests suspiciously failed in koji's build.log. There are ~1000 and ~4000 source files in nwchem compiled with debug and optimization flags, respectively, and the build time 2-3 hours. Have you even informed upstream ? Therefore, in my opinion, we have to stick to the default nwchem flags. I understand your position. I can just suggest to ask a Bundled Libraries exception in order to resolve this problem. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Exceptions -- 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 1057670] Review Request: jetty8 - jetty compatibility package (libs only)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057670 --- Comment #1 from Pete MacKinnon pmack...@redhat.com --- Should be built as: rpmbuild -ba --without osgi --without nosql jetty8.spec osgi,nosql support are left in as conditionals for the time being. -- 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 1057670] Review Request: jetty8 - jetty compatibility package (libs only)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057670 Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mizde...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com --- Several issues: 1) You should use %mvn_install to install artifacts. 2) Requires are incorrect (they still require Jetty 9.x modules), you should drop explicit requres and rely on autorequires. 3) %pre, %post, %preun, %postun are not needed and should be removed. 4) You should enable tests or document why they are skipped. 5) Unneeded modules (like OSGi and NoSQL) should be removed together with all the conditional cruft. -- 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 1055436] Review Request: povray - The Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055436 --- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #2) 1. How to deal with that large doc piece? I do not intend to split them into a separate doc-package. These docs are application docs without which this package would not be helpful to users. All that splitting out them would do is adding package complexity. 2. I've sent en email to inquiry if it's legitimate to use The Fedora Project: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2014-January/009965.html As outlined on the list, I am going apply some magic to derive COMPILED_BY from %vendor. -- 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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 984605] Review Request: nwchem - Delivering High-Performance Computational Chemistry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984605 --- Comment #19 from marcindulak marcin.du...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #18) (In reply to marcindulak from comment #17) This is also visible from all tests suspiciously failed in koji's build.log. There are ~1000 and ~4000 source files in nwchem compiled with debug and optimization flags, respectively, and the build time 2-3 hours. Have you even informed upstream ? i have been involved in some discussions on the nwchem forums, and the focus there is usually to get the code to compile and run at all on different high performance systems. It's a scientific code, and as such has only a best effort support. Also one cannot really rely on the QA test set (i don't know if the situation described here improved http://www.nwchem-sw.org/index.php/Special:AWCforum/st/id133/). The full test set includes ~400 cases (there is no concept of unit testing there - these are regular nwchem runs, some VERY heavy), and what i run during the rpmbuild is a small subset of 20. Of course when the nwchem RPM gets into Fedora i will drop a note at the nwchem forum, and mention compilation flags requirement problem. Therefore, in my opinion, we have to stick to the default nwchem flags. I understand your position. I can just suggest to ask a Bundled Libraries exception in order to resolve this problem. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Exceptions i was not clear enough. nwchem does not distribute GA, it compiles it in the executables. So - it's only a question about dropping %optflags or not. -- 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 1055721] Review Request: qpid-dispatch - Dispatch router for Qpid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055721 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- qpid-dispatch-0.1-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qpid-dispatch-0.1-2.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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- rubygem-rgen-0.6.6-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-rgen-0.6.6-2.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 984605] Review Request: nwchem - Delivering High-Performance Computational Chemistry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984605 --- Comment #20 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com --- Please, document this situation in a specfile comment. Then, I'll start the final 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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- rubygem-rgen-0.6.6-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-rgen-0.6.6-2.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 1051901] Review Request: rubygem-rgen - Ruby Modelling and Generator Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- rubygem-rgen-0.6.6-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-rgen-0.6.6-2.el6 -- 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 1055436] Review Request: povray - The Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055436 --- Comment #4 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- Next iteration with modified COMPILED_BY magic: Spec URL: http://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/povray.spec SRPM URL: http://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/povray-3.7-0.2.20131116git39ce8a2.fc21.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 984605] Review Request: nwchem - Delivering High-Performance Computational Chemistry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984605 --- Comment #21 from marcindulak marcin.du...@gmail.com --- koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6449305 Spec URL: http://marcindulak.fedorapeople.org/packages/nwchem/r04/nwchem.spec SRPM URL: http://marcindulak.fedorapeople.org/packages/nwchem/r04/nwchem-6.3.2-4.fc21.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 699902] Review Request: python-manuel - Build tested documentation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=699902 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-manuel-1.7.2-4.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-manuel-1.7.2-4.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 755510] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet - Gnome shell system monitor extension
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510 --- Comment #56 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk --- They say no news is good news. But I’m afraid this might not be the case. I cannot review the package, although I can point to an unsatisfied dependency (it might be a bug). In preferences, the fan tab requires lm_sensors to be able to select a sensor. Well, I have all lm_sensors pagackage installed (even the debuginfo). Is another dependency missing here? Many thanks for your help, Pablo -- 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 1057766] New: Review Request: clustal-omega - command line tool for multiple sequence alignment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057766 Bug ID: 1057766 Summary: Review Request: clustal-omega - command line tool for multiple sequence alignment Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nonamed...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/clustal-omega/clustal-omega.spec SRPM URL: http://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/clustal-omega/clustal-omega-1.2.0-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Clustal Omega is the latest addition to the Clustal family. It offers a significant increase in scalability over previous versions, allowing hundreds of thousands of sequences to be aligned in only a few hours Fedora Account System Username: nonamedotc This is my first package and I am requesting someone to sponsor me. Thanks! rpmlint output - clustal-omega.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: clustal-omega-1.2.0.tar.gz clustal-omega.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalability - availability, sociability, implacability clustal-omega.src: W: invalid-url Source0: clustal-omega-1.2.0.tar.gz clustal-omega.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalability - availability, sociability, implacability clustal-omega.x86_64: E: call-to-mktemp /usr/bin/clustalo clustal-omega.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary clustalo clustal-omega-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. I cannot figure out how to fix call-to-mktemp error. -- 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 1057770] New: Review Request: Squeryl - ORM and DSL for SQL databases in Scala
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057770 Bug ID: 1057770 Summary: Review Request: Squeryl - ORM and DSL for SQL databases in Scala Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: wi...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://freevariable.com/squeryl/Squeryl.spec SRPM URL: http://freevariable.com/squeryl/Squeryl-0.9.5.6-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: ORM and DSL for SQL databases in Scala Fedora Account System Username: willb -- 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 1055799] Review Request: sbt - simple build tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055799 Will Benton wi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1057770 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057770 [Bug 1057770] Review Request: Squeryl - ORM and DSL for SQL databases in Scala -- 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 1057770] Review Request: Squeryl - ORM and DSL for SQL databases in Scala
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057770 Will Benton wi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1055799 (sbt-package) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055799 [Bug 1055799] Review Request: sbt - simple build tool -- 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 1057766] Review Request: clustal-omega - command line tool for multiple sequence alignment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057766 --- Comment #1 from nonamed...@gmail.com --- Since the package collection maintainers wiki page talked about bonus points, here is my attempt to get bonus points. :) My build attempt of clustalo at COPR - https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/nonamedotc/Clustal-omega/monitor/ -- 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 984605] Review Request: nwchem - Delivering High-Performance Computational Chemistry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984605 --- Comment #22 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com --- Fedora packagers should make every effort to support all primary architectures. If nwchem cannot be built (or doesn't work) on ARM (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6450997), follow these guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Architecture_Support. -- 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 1022551] Review Request: bouncycastle-pkix - CMS, PKCS, EAC, TSP, CMP, CRMF, OCSP for Bouncy Castle
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022551
Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
See points marked [!] below
= 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
Why is there a BuildRequires on java-devel = 1:1.7 and a Requires on
java = 1:1.7? Is not Java 1.5 sufficient (i.e. no versioned requires
necessary)?
Is the full java really necessary, or is java-headless sufficient?
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
However, rpmlint complains about a spelling error:
particuar → particular
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[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.
[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]: 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]: 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
Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)
Maven:
[x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping
Note: Some add_maven_depmap calls found. Please check if they are correct
or update to latest guidelines
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even
when building with ant
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use %{_mavenpomdir} instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not
[Bug 1057766] Review Request: clustal-omega - command line tool for multiple sequence alignment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057766
Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||karlthe...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com ---
few remarks and easy fixes:
* drop the requires to argtable, as it's a C package, it will be computed by
RPM
* only argtable-devem is required as a BR, argtable will be pulled by it anyway
* unless you plan to maintain EPEL5 branch, %defattr is useless (and you'd have
to fix other stuff for EPEL5)
* use %{_libdir}
--
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 1057620] Review Request: python-whoosh - A library for indexing and searching text
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057620 Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2014-01-24 15:22:19 --- Comment #1 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- This is already in Fedora: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/python-whoosh *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 948757 *** -- 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 948757] Review Request: python-whoosh - Fast, pure-Python full text indexing, search, and spell checking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948757 Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sgall...@redhat.com --- Comment #12 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- *** Bug 1057620 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 1057766] Review Request: clustal-omega - command line tool for multiple sequence alignment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057766 --- Comment #3 from nonamed...@gmail.com --- Thanks Haikel for your comments. Updated spec file and source rpm below SPEC URL: http://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/clustal-omega/clustal-omega.spec SRPM URL: http://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/clustal-omega/clustal-omega-1.2.0-1.fc20.src.rpm rpmlint output - clustal-omega.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: clustal-omega-1.2.0.tar.gz clustal-omega.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalability - availability, sociability, implacability clustal-omega.src: W: invalid-url Source0: clustal-omega-1.2.0.tar.gz 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- 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 1057766] Review Request: clustal-omega - command line tool for multiple sequence alignment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057766
Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||terje...@phys.ntnu.no
--- Comment #4 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no ---
Please provide full url to source tarball.
Why this strangess *after* make install:
install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_sbindir}
Nice to have:
more explicit file listing.
%description
is a bit cryptic (to me at least).
Update changelog on *every* change.
Please do a koji scratch build.
--
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 973853] Review Request: create-tx-configuration - An easy way to create Transifex client configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973853 Eric Christensen spa...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed|2013-06-13 13:39:28 |2014-01-24 16:21:25 --- Comment #10 from Eric Christensen spa...@redhat.com --- Thanks! -- 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 839104] Review Request: bluebird - Themes for GTK+3 as part of the Bluebird theme.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839104 Adam Miller admil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||admil...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #21 from Adam Miller admil...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: bluebird New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: maxamillion kevin -- 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 839104] Review Request: bluebird - Themes for GTK+3 as part of the Bluebird theme.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839104 --- Comment #22 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 839104] Review Request: bluebird - Themes for GTK+3 as part of the Bluebird theme.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839104 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1057766] Review Request: clustal-omega - command line tool for multiple sequence alignment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057766 --- Comment #5 from nonamed...@gmail.com --- Hi Terje I have made the changes as you have mentioned. Updated spec file and source rpm below. SPEC URL: http://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/clustal-omega/clustal-omega.spec SRPM URL: http://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/clustal-omega/clustal-omega-1.2.0-1.fc20.src.rpm Also, koji scratch builds - against rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6451460 against f20: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6451501 Please let me know if I should change anything else. Thanks for your comments! -- 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 mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6451561
$ rpmlint -i -v *
python3-pypump.noarch: I: checking
python3-pypump.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python3-oauthlib
You must let rpm find the library dependencies by itself. Do not put unneeded
explicit Requires: tags.
python3-pypump.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) io - oi, Io, ii
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python3-pypump.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io - oi, Io, ii
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python3-pypump.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pythonic -
Python, python
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python3-pypump.noarch: I: checking-url http://pypi.python.org/pypi/PyPump
(timeout 10 seconds)
python-pypump.src: I: checking
python-pypump.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) io - oi, Io, ii
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-pypump.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io - oi, Io, ii
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-pypump.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pythonic - Python,
python
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-pypump.src: I: checking-url http://pypi.python.org/pypi/PyPump (timeout
10 seconds)
python-pypump.src: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/P/PyPump/PyPump-0.4.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
python-pypump.noarch: I: checking
python-pypump.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-oauthlib
You must let rpm find the library dependencies by itself. Do not put unneeded
explicit Requires: tags.
python-pypump.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) io - oi, Io, ii
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-pypump.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io - oi, Io, ii
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-pypump.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pythonic -
Python, python
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
python-pypump.noarch: I: checking-url http://pypi.python.org/pypi/PyPump
(timeout 10 seconds)
python-pypump.spec: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/P/PyPump/PyPump-0.4.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 9 warnings.
Already discussed issues, no new ones so far.
-
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 *
1e64f66888e57724adc834ffe9619acd2fbc5a44b5ec7cf615e2b03dbc6f0a81
PyPump-0.4.tar.gz
1e64f66888e57724adc834ffe9619acd2fbc5a44b5ec7cf615e2b03dbc6f0a81
PyPump-0.4.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
[Bug 1051915] Review Request: silvia - SImple Library for the Verification and Issuance of Attributes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051915
Paul Wouters pwout...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Paul Wouters pwout...@redhat.com ---
APPROVED, but please look at fixing the minor items found
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
minor issues:
License should be changed from BSD to BSD with advertising
silvia.src: E: description-line-too-long C SImple Library for the Verification
and Issuance of Attributes of IRMA cards (irmacard.org).
I know its their name, perhaps not explain the acronym in the summary?
Attribute library for IRMA cards perhaps?
Can you report to upstream regarding obsoleted AC_PROG_LIBTOOL?
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
BSD (2 clause), Unknown or generated. 1 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/paul/silvia/licensecheck.txt
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package 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]: 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 10240 bytes in 4 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]: 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]: 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.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]:
[Bug 1045556] Review Request: hbase - The Apache Hadoop database
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1045556 Bug 1045556 depends on bug 1053464, which changed state. Bug 1053464 Summary: hadoop: Switch to netty3 compat package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1053464 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- 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 1045556] Review Request: hbase - The Apache Hadoop database
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1045556 Bug 1045556 depends on bug 1049905, which changed state. Bug 1049905 Summary: hadoop: FTBFS in rawhide https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1049905 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- 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 1031337] Review Request: notion - A tabbed, tiling window manager forked from Ion3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1031337 Jeff Backus jeff.bac...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2014-01-24 18:27:00 --- Comment #10 from Jeff Backus jeff.bac...@gmail.com --- Received the official response from Fedora legal. The license is considered too restrictive and therefore not suitable for inclusion in Fedora. Moving to RPMFusion and closing: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3151 Thanks to all for your input! Regards, Jeff -- 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 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-pypump Short Description: Python Pump.io library Owners: ralph Branches: f20 f19 el6 epel7 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 1047510] Review Request: php-opencloud - PHP SDK for OpenStack/Rackspace APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047510 --- Comment #16 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com --- What do you mean? I'm doing that right now in doc subpkg, not? Whoops, indeed you are - I missed that. As Remi doesn't seem to be taking the review, I guess I will. -- 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 971367] Review Request: python-pyroute2 - Python netlink library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971367 Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-01-24 18:56:18 -- 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 1047510] Review Request: php-opencloud - PHP SDK for OpenStack/Rackspace APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047510 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|awill...@redhat.com -- 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 1030710] Review Request: python-pgpdump - PGP packet parser library in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1030710 Aviso red...@avram.us changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(red...@avram.us) |needinfo+ -- 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 1047510] Review Request: php-opencloud - PHP SDK for OpenStack/Rackspace APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047510 --- Comment #17 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com --- rpmlint --- php-opencloud-doc.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/php-opencloud-doc/docs/api/css/jquery.treeview.css php-opencloud.src: W: strange-permission php-opencloud-1.6.0.tar.gz 0600L not blockers, but worth fixing. -- 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 1047510] Review Request: php-opencloud - PHP SDK for OpenStack/Rackspace APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047510 --- Comment #18 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com --- phpcompatinfo gives date, hash, json and pcre extensions, all listed in the spec - looks fine. -- 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 1005792] Review Request: uima-addons - Apache UIMA Addons components
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005792 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1025904 (solr) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025904 [Bug 1025904] Review Request: solr - Ultra-fast Lucene-based Search Server -- 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 1025904] Review Request: solr - Ultra-fast Lucene-based Search Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025904 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1005792 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005792 [Bug 1005792] Review Request: uima-addons - Apache UIMA Addons components -- 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 1005782] Review Request: uimaj - Apache UIMA is an implementation of the OASIS-UIMA specifications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005782 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1025904 (solr) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025904 [Bug 1025904] Review Request: solr - Ultra-fast Lucene-based Search Server -- 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 1025904] Review Request: solr - Ultra-fast Lucene-based Search Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025904 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1005782 (uimaj) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005782 [Bug 1005782] Review Request: uimaj - Apache UIMA is an implementation of the OASIS-UIMA specifications -- 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 1047510] Review Request: php-opencloud - PHP SDK for OpenStack/Rackspace APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047510 --- Comment #19 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github seems fairly clear that a commit ID should be used for github sourced projects if they don't have some kind of 'external to github' tarball distribution, though I'm not sure if it's really *meant* to. -- 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 1047510] Review Request: php-opencloud - PHP SDK for OpenStack/Rackspace APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047510 --- Comment #20 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com --- Aside from the above, looks good. c#17 and c#18 are not blockers. c#19 may be, at least I'd like you to consider it and give an opinion before approving the review. If you disagree with the guideline, we might want to ask FPC to clarify it. https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/233 does seem to suggest they explicitly considered the question of whether using tarballs generated from tags was OK and seem to have decided 'no'. I still might suggest that they make that _absolutely_ clear in the text, though. -- 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 1050744] Review Request: belle-sip - Linphone SIP stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1050744 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Comment #14 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Fwiw, GPLv2+ + BSD/MIT = GPLv2+, pretty sure the same can be said of libpng/zlib too -- 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
