[Bug 1064995] Review Request: perl-File-Slurp-Tiny - A simple, sane and efficient file slurper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064995 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-File-Slurp-Tiny-0.003-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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 1069797] Review Request: perl-Module-Extract-Namespaces - Extract the package declarations from a module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069797 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Module-Extract-Namespa ||ces-1.02-3.fc21 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-03-17 02:22:16 -- 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 1064995] Review Request: perl-File-Slurp-Tiny - A simple, sane and efficient file slurper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064995 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-File-Slurp-Tiny-0.003- ||3.fc21 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-03-17 02:23:00 -- 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 1059942] Review Request: ghc-network - Network library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059942 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|high|medium -- 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 1076740] Review Request: ghc-newtype - A typeclass and set of functions for working with newtypes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076740 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|medium |low Severity|medium |low --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- (lowered priority since no longer needed for constraints - lens) -- 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 1074268] Review Request: perl-Hijk - Specialized HTTP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074268 David Dick dd...@cpan.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- yeah, this is my first review. :) i've thought about the licensing issue. I think it's safe to use the license link on http://search.cpan.org/~avar/Hijk-0.12/, which points to http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php as the source file for the license. to finish the review, put the content of this file, namely - The MIT License (MIT) Copyright (c) year copyright holders Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the Software), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED AS IS, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. -- into a file called LICENSE.txt (or equivalent) and then you can release it. 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 977141] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-init - Generate project scaffolding from a template
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977141 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1057505 Flags|needinfo?(mr.marcelo.barbos | |a...@gmail.com)| |needinfo?(zbys...@in.waw.pl | |) | --- Comment #9 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- I somehow thought that comment #7 was only about /usr/bin/env, and completely missed the updated spec. Sorry. Everything seems to be fixed, but it now seems to depend on newer async package. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057505 [Bug 1057505] nodejs-async-0.2.10 is available -- 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 1075595] Review Request: ghc-transformers-compat - A compatibility shim exposing the new types from transformers 0.3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1075595 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|999011 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=999011 [Bug 999011] idris-0.9.11.2 is available -- 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 1076463] Review Request: playitagainsam - Record and replay interactive terminal sessions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076463 --- Comment #4 from Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com --- Thanks Meng for pointing version tag issue, I am surprised that rpmlint didn't catch this issue. Generally those error caught by rpmlint. for snapshot capture version tag:- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#NonNumericRelease -- 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 1077081] New: Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 Bug ID: 1077081 Summary: Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: holca...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://github.com/holcapek/spread-rpm/raw/master/spread.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/holcapek/spread-rpm/raw/master/spread-4.2.0-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: The Spread Toolkit is a computer software package that provides a high performance group communication system that is resilient to faults across local and wide area networks. Fedora Account System Username: holcapek -- 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #2 from Jan Holcapek holca...@gmail.com --- $ rpmlint spread-4.2.0-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm spread.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Spread spread.x86_64: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary flush_user 1 packages and 0 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #1 from Jan Holcapek holca...@gmail.com --- $ rpmlint spread-4.2.0-1.fc19.src.rpm spread.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Spread spread.src: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189, http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628 1 packages and 0 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #3 from Jan Holcapek holca...@gmail.com --- $ rpmlint spread-devel-4.2.0-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm spread-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on spread/spread-libs/libspread spread-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread-devel.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libspread.so.3.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 spread-devel.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man3/SP_multicast.3.gz 28: warning: macro `TB' not defined spread-devel.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man3/FL_multicast.3.gz 50: warning: macro `TB' not defined 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #4 from Jan Holcapek holca...@gmail.com --- $ rpmlint spread-static-4.2.0-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm spread-static.x86_64: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 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 1024589] Review Request: zlib-js - JavaScript library reimplementing compression
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024589 --- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Tom, sorry for the slow response. I think that the naming proposed by Jamie is OK: nodejs-zlibjs and js-zlib. The tarball is called zlibjs, so even upstream seems to skip the dot. Jamie, thank you for the updated spec file. It seems much better than my version. I made two changes though: - I reverted your replacement of sed with patch, since the patch seems very fragile and will probably have to be updated quite often when upstream changes the ant file - I simplified the arch condition using grep May I add you as a co-maintainer? Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/zlib-js.spec SRPM URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/zlib-js-0.2.0-3.fc20.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 1024589] Review Request: zlib-js - JavaScript library reimplementing compression
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024589 --- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Argh, wrong url: Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/js-zlib.spec SRPM URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/js-zlib-0.2.0-3.fc20.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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #5 from Jan Holcapek holca...@gmail.com --- Regargind the invalid-license warning: I've dropped a question to le...@lists.fedoraproject.org asking whether Spread Open Source License is suitable for a Fedora package. -- 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #6 from Jan Holcapek holca...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Jan Holcapek from comment #1) spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189, http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628 This is due to registration form to be filled in to download the tarball. -- 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 845115] Review request: python-django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845115 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard|Stalled Reviewer| --- Comment #18 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com --- Sorry for the long response time. My notes: - When renaming a package, you should not only Obsolete it, but also Provide it [1]. - rpmlint reports mixed use of tabs and spaces in specfile. Please decide for one and use it throughout the whole specfile. - The README file says client.py taken from recaptcha-client licenced MIT/X11 by Mike Crawford. - I therefore suggest changing License tag to BSD and MIT. - The tests are not actually run. Mock outputs this: DEBUG: + /usr/bin/python2 -m unittest DEBUG: -- DEBUG: Ran 0 tests in 0.000s Please look into this. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(ade...@gmail.com) --- Comment #12 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Hello, Is that package still under 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 1059803] Review Request: sniproxy - Transparent TLS proxy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059803 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(cicku...@gmail.co ||m) --- Comment #12 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Hello, Is that package still under 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 1075822] Review Request: openstack-marconi - OpenStack Message Queuing Service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1075822 Flavio Percoco fperc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jober...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(jobernar@redhat.c ||om) -- 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 1075822] Review Request: openstack-marconi - OpenStack Message Queuing Service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1075822 Flavio Percoco fperc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Comment #4 is|1 |0 private|| -- 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 1069629] Review Request: jenkins-executable-war - Jenkins Executable War
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069629 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||socho...@redhat.com --- Comment #4 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com --- Are you really reading f-r output or just grepping for [!]? Because f-r clearly tells you you are missing java plugin so the checks are incomplete. -- 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lkund...@v3.sk Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk -- 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 1052040] Review Request: xtv - A file manager for the Linux console/xterm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1052040 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #20 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- I've sponsored Mohammed, removing the blocker. 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081
Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal)
--- Comment #7 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk ---
0.) Please package a more recent version.
4.3.0 seems already available.
1.) Source can not be downloaded
spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189,
http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Please don't use the URL in Source tag then, but in a comment instead:
# Download it from: http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz
Source0: %{name}-src-%{version}.tar.gz
2.) Why do you ship static package?
Static linking is strongly discouraged and should be avoided whenever possible.
3.) Why do you override docdir with pkgdocdir?
Apart from that it won't build with older RPM (such as in el7 and older), it's
not a very usual thing to do and result in path names that are not stable
across package releases.
4.) Libraries are shipped in -devel packages
You probably want to include in the main or -libs package. That will need
moving the ldconfig scriptlets as well.
(In reply to Jan Holcapek from comment #5)
Regargind the invalid-license warning: I've dropped a question to
le...@lists.fedoraproject.org asking whether Spread Open Source License is
suitable for a Fedora package.
Thanks. I believe they are merely clarifying the legal matters without changing
the meaning and their advertising clause is very 4-clause BSDish, therefore it
should be fine for Fedora as long as nothing GPLed links to it. Adding FE_LEGAL
dependency.
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235
[Bug 182235] Fedora Legal 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 1076463] Review Request: playitagainsam - Record and replay interactive terminal sessions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076463
--- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
I am surprised that rpmlint didn't catch this issue.
Generally those error caught by rpmlint.
That would be usual. Why should it know?
| Version:%{commit}
| Release:1%{?dist}
| Source0:
https://github.com/rfk/%{name}/archive/%{commit}/%{name}-%{commit}.tar.gz
--
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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags|needinfo?(ade...@gmail.com) | --- Comment #13 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- Hi Nikos, I aplogize for the delay, I take care of this ASAP. Today if possible. -- 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 1069257] Review Request: fparser - Function parser library for C++
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069257
--- Comment #18 from Till Hofmann hofm...@kbsg.rwth-aachen.de ---
(In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #17)
They have chosen to patch it as well, but differently. They add an Autotools
based configure script and include a pkgconfig file in their -dev package.
Do you think we should adopt their patches or can we stay with cmake?
Depending on which other projects rely on building with the pkgconfig file
(or, in the future, your CMake files), it may become necessary to join
forces and agree on a compatible build framework (even if upstream does not
want to include those files [yet], maybe not even in a contrib folder).
$ rpm -qp --provides fparser-4.5.1-3.fc20.x86_64.rpm |grep ^l
libfparser.so.4.5()(64bit)
Your libfparser.so.4.5 SONAME currently differs from Debian's library naming
scheme. That's a binary incompatibility to think about as well.
Inventing library sonames at the distribution level (without support from
upstream) is non-trivial almost always. Skimming over the fparser
changelog/news it's hard for me to predict how compatible the individual
minor releases have been and will be. Especially the burden of checking
releases for ABI compatibility (and updating the SONAME version
appropriately) will be on your shoulders (i.e. the packager's shoulders).
Debian's libfoo-$major.$minor.so naming is a slightly better compromise,
because it is explicit about $major.$minor being the product release version
and not being a varying library interface version.
Thoughts?
Seems reasonable. From the changelog it seems like any patch version update is
compatible to the previous version while all minor version updates may change
the ABI, but I guess we shouldn't rely on that. I've adopted the changes you
suggested.
SPEC file: http://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/fparser.spec
cmake patch: http://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/fparser.cmake.patch
SRPM: http://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/fparser-4.5.1-4.fc20.src.rpm
I don't know much about cmake so I'm not sure if the way I added the symlink
libfparser.so - libfparser-4.5.so is the proper way to do so.
%{_libdir}/cmake/*
When not adding Requires: cmake the directory needs to be included in the
package
Fixed
--
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 1070946] Review Request: python-SimpleCV - Open source framework for building computer vision applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070946 Luis Bazan bazanlui...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | 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 965095] python-rsa - Pure-Python RSA implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965095 --- Comment #15 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 965095] python-rsa - Pure-Python RSA implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965095 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 968603] Review Request: nodejs-joosex-namespace-depended - Cross-platform (browser/NodeJS), non-blocking, handling of dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=968603 --- Comment #7 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 968603] Review Request: nodejs-joosex-namespace-depended - Cross-platform (browser/NodeJS), non-blocking, handling of dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=968603 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 1050805] Review Request: glyphicons-halflings-fonts - Precisely prepared monochromatic icons and symbols
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1050805 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 1050805] Review Request: glyphicons-halflings-fonts - Precisely prepared monochromatic icons and symbols
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1050805 --- 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 1057872] Review Request: libusbg - Library for USB gadget-configfs userspace functionality
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057872 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 1057872] Review Request: libusbg - Library for USB gadget-configfs userspace functionality
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057872 --- Comment #11 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 1059942] Review Request: ghc-network - Network library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059942 --- 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 1059942] Review Request: ghc-network - Network library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059942 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 1069453] Review Request: ghc-nats - Haskell 98 natural numbers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069453 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1065758] Review Request: omniORBpy - Robust high-performance CORBA ORB for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065758 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 1069453] Review Request: ghc-nats - Haskell 98 natural numbers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069453 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 1070941] Review Request: python-svgwrite - python library to create svg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070941 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 1065758] Review Request: omniORBpy - Robust high-performance CORBA ORB for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065758 --- Comment #23 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 1070941] Review Request: python-svgwrite - python library to create svg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070941 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1074268] Review Request: perl-Hijk - Specialized HTTP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074268 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 1074268] Review Request: perl-Hijk - Specialized HTTP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074268 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1074418] Review Request: nodejs-superagent - A small, progressive client-side HTTP request library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074418 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1074418] Review Request: nodejs-superagent - A small, progressive client-side HTTP request library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074418 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 1074651] Review Request: xcb-util-cursor - Cursor library on top of libxcb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074651 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 1074651] Review Request: xcb-util-cursor - Cursor library on top of libxcb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074651 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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 1076840] Review Request: nodejs-uglify-to-browserify - A transform to make UglifyJS work in browserify
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076840 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 1076840] Review Request: nodejs-uglify-to-browserify - A transform to make UglifyJS work in browserify
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076840 --- 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 1076463] Review Request: playitagainsam - Record and replay interactive terminal sessions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076463 --- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- D'oh! That would be usual. typo: _unusual_ It would be unusual for rpmlint to issue a warning related to the versioning, if the hardcoded %version is also used in the tarball. -- 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 1070230] Review Request: python-django15 - A high-level Python Web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070230
--- Comment #12 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Lars Kellogg-Stedman from comment #11)
This latest spec file seems to resolve all the directory ownership issues,
but you still need to fix the quoting on your find statements (bottom of
comment #8). With that in place we should be all set :).
Ah, sorry, I forgot that.
After removing that, I ran rpmlint again on the files:
[mrunge@sofja SPECS (master)]$ rpmlint ./python-django15.spec
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-django15-1.5.5-7.fc20.src.rpm
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python-django15-1.5.5-7.fc20.noarch.rpm
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python-django15-doc-1.5.5-7.fc20.noarch.rpm
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python3-django15-doc-1.5.5-7.fc20.noarch.rpm
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python3-django15-1.5.5-7.fc20.noarch.rpm
./python-django15.spec:210: W: macro-in-comment %{__python3}
python-django15.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Django - Fandango
python-django15.src:210: W: macro-in-comment %{__python3}
python-django15.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Django -
Fandango
python3-django15.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Django -
Fandango
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
Spelling issues are clear, and Macro in comment issue: I left out running
checks, line 210 (was at that time, now 204)
%{__python3} runtests.py --settings=test_sqlite --verbosity=2
Updated
SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django15.spec
SRPM: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django15-1.5.5-7.fc20.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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948
--- Comment #5 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com ---
Created attachment 875488
-- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=875488action=edit
improved spec-file
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
= 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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Unknown or generated. 306 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /home/besser82/shared/fedora/review/1019948-python-
astroML/licensecheck.txt
--- license-tag is fine. :)
[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.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
--- see comments below.
[x]: 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.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 3 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
--- issues are present.
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: 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
[!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
--- please remove that, unless you want to build for el5...
[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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python-
astroML-doc
--- false positive. doc-pkg is fine to install without that deps.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
[Bug 1077192] New: Review Request: perl-Test-API - Test a list of subroutines provided by a module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077192 Bug ID: 1077192 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-API - Test a list of subroutines provided by a module Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: p...@city-fan.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://subversion.city-fan.org/repos/cfo-repo/perl-Test-API/branches/fedora/perl-Test-API.spec SRPM URL: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Test-API/perl-Test-API-0.004-2.fc21.src.rpm Description: This simple test module checks the subroutines provided by a module. This is useful for confirming a planned API in testing and ensuring that other functions aren't unintentionally included via import. Fedora Account System Username: pghmcfc -- 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 1057872] Review Request: libusbg - Library for USB gadget-configfs userspace functionality
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057872 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2014-03-17 09:09:35 -- 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 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081
--- Comment #8 from Jan Holcapek holca...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Lubomir Rintel from comment #7)
0.) Please package a more recent version.
4.3.0 seems already available.
I understand your concern, however, this is intentional: the reason why I
decided to package spread (in this particular version) was to encourage the
undisclosed vendor of undisclosed (proprietary) database system to not ship
spread 4.2.0 binaries as part of their (messy) RPM, but rather rely on
soon-to-be-part-of-Fedora/EPEL package of its own.
If you are not strongly against, I would packge version 4.2.0 first, and push
an update to 4.3.0 only then.
1.) Source can not be downloaded
spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189,
http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Please don't use the URL in Source tag then, but in a comment instead:
# Download it from: http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz
Source0: %{name}-src-%{version}.tar.gz
Fixed: relative Source0, comment w/ download URL.
2.) Why do you ship static package?
Static linking is strongly discouraged and should be avoided whenever
possible.
Fixed: no -static package.
3.) Why do you override docdir with pkgdocdir?
Apart from that it won't build with older RPM (such as in el7 and older),
it's not a very usual thing to do and result in path names that are not
stable across package releases.
Fixed.
4.) Libraries are shipped in -devel packages
You probably want to include in the main or -libs package. That will need
moving the ldconfig scriptlets as well.
Fixed: -devel package w/ headers only, -libs package w/ shared libs.
(In reply to Jan Holcapek from comment #5)
Regargind the invalid-license warning: I've dropped a question to
le...@lists.fedoraproject.org asking whether Spread Open Source License is
suitable for a Fedora package.
Thanks. I believe they are merely clarifying the legal matters without
changing the meaning and their advertising clause is very 4-clause BSDish,
therefore it should be fine for Fedora as long as nothing GPLed links to it.
Adding FE_LEGAL dependency.
That's good news.
--
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 1076863] Review Request: cmockery2 - Lightweight C unit testing framework.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076863
--- Comment #9 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
%files devel
%{_includedir}/cmockery*
%{_libdir}/libcmockery.so
%exclude %{_libdir}/libcmockery.a
%exclude %{_libdir}/libcmockery.la
The proper Group tag for such library -devel packages has always been
Development/Libraries. Don't look at bad/poor examples in the package
collection.
--
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 1076863] Review Request: cmockery2 - Lightweight C unit testing framework.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076863 --- Comment #10 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- It's Development/Libraries here, too: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/cmocka.git/plain/cmocka.spec The group of that base package is wrong and should be System Environment/Libraries. However, the Group tag may also be omitted nowadays. -- 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 1064576] Review Request: python-freezegun - Let your Python tests travel through time
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064576 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-freezegun-0.1.12-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-freezegun-0.1.12-1.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 1076863] Review Request: cmockery2 - Lightweight C unit testing framework.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076863 --- Comment #11 from Luis Pabon lpa...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #10) It's Development/Libraries here, too: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/cmocka.git/plain/cmocka.spec The group of that base package is wrong and should be System Environment/Libraries. However, the Group tag may also be omitted nowadays. Thank you. I have updated the spec file and SRPM: New updated packages available: SRPM and specfile update here: Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/lpabon/fedora/master/cmockery2/1.3.4/cmockery2.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/lpabon/fedora/raw/master/cmockery2/1.3.4/cmockery2-1.3.4-1.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 1065446] Review Request: hive - Hadoop-compatible data warehouse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065446 Will Benton wi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Will Benton wi...@redhat.com --- Thanks for making these changes, Pete. I also appreciate the other cleanups you've done in the spec. The main concern I have remaining is that some of the libraries that hive has symlinked are only required transitively, but I'm just noting it here in case it presents a problem in the future. Review granted. -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #6 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com --- Thank you for reviewing :) Pushed fixed spec/srpm Spec URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML.spec SRPM URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20.src.rpm Greetings, Christian -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR),| |100 (ML-SIG)| Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- LGTM, now. :D = Solution = Package APPROVED!!! # You can go on with SCM Admin Request, now. If you need some assitance, you know how to get in touch with me. :D Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=100 [Bug 100] Machine Learning 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 1011110] Machine Learning SIG - review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=100 Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|1019948 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 [Bug 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com --- Thanks for reviewing :) # New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-astroML Short Description: Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy Owners: lupinix Branches: f20 InitialCC: ml-sig -- 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 1065446] Review Request: hive - Hadoop-compatible data warehouse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065446 Pete MacKinnon pmack...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Pete MacKinnon pmack...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: hive Short Description: The Apache Hadoop data warehouse Owners: pmackinn Branches: InitialCC: java-sig -- 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 1077268] New: Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077268 Bug ID: 1077268 Summary: Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: chrisder...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML-addons.spec SRPM URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML-addons-0.2.1-2.fc20.src.rpm Description: astroML is split into two components. The core astroML library is written in python only, and is designed to be very easy to install for any users, even those who don't have a working C or fortran compiler. A companion library, astroML_addons, can be optionally installed for increased performance on certain algorithms. Every algorithm in astroML_addons has a pure python counterpart in the core astroML implementation, but the astroML_addons library contains faster and more efficient implementations in compiled code. Furthermore, if astroML_addons is installed on your system, the core astroML library will import and use the faster routines by default. Fedora Account System Username: lupinix Thank you very much for reviewing. -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1077268 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077268 [Bug 1077268] Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package -- 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 1077268] Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077268 Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com Depends On||1019948 Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bjoern.es...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Taken ;) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 [Bug 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #9 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 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 1065446] Review Request: hive - Hadoop-compatible data warehouse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065446 --- 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 1065446] Review Request: hive - Hadoop-compatible data warehouse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065446 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 1076516] Review Request: rubygem-spring - Rails application preloader
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076516 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||vondr...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com --- I'll take this for a 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 1077295] New: Review Request: perl-Exporter-Tiny - An exporter with the features of Sub::Exporter but only core dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077295 Bug ID: 1077295 Summary: Review Request: perl-Exporter-Tiny - An exporter with the features of Sub::Exporter but only core dependencies Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: p...@city-fan.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://subversion.city-fan.org/repos/cfo-repo/perl-Exporter-Tiny/branches/fedora/perl-Exporter-Tiny.spec SRPM URL: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Exporter-Tiny/perl-Exporter-Tiny-0.036-2.fc21.src.rpm Description: Exporter::Tiny supports many of Sub::Exporter's external-facing features including renaming imported functions with the -as, -prefix and -suffix options; explicit destinations with the into option; and alternative installers with the installer option. But it's written in only about 40% as many lines of code and with zero non-core dependencies. Its internal-facing interface is closer to Exporter.pm, with configuration done through the @EXPORT, @EXPORT_OK and %EXPORT_TAGS package variables. Exporter::Tiny performs most of its internal duties (including resolution of tag names to sub names, resolution of sub names to coderefs, and installation of coderefs into the target package) as method calls, which means they can be overridden to provide interesting behavior. Fedora Account System Username: pghmcfc Note: this spec file targets EPEL-5 as well as modern Fedora, hence the use of old-fashioned spec elements -- 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 1077268] Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077268
--- Comment #2 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
Issues:
===
- Permissions on files are set properly.
Note: See rpmlint output
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions
--- use `%fixperms %{buildroot}/*` to correct this.
- setup.py present in package.
--- use `find %{buildroot} -name 'setup.py*' -print0 | xargs -0 rm -rf`
to fix this.
- please use the %{python2_version}-macro as suggested in astroML-review
inside %files for packaging the egg.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
--- python-plugins don't have versioned .so files.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[-]: 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:
Unknown or generated. 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/besser82/shared/fedora/review/1077268-python-
astroML-addons/licensecheck.txt
--- license-tag is fine.
[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.
[-]: 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 20480 bytes in 1 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
--- issues are present. :(
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package 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]: 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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from
[Bug 1077301] New: Review Request: python-aaargh - An astonishingly awesome application argument helper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077301 Bug ID: 1077301 Summary: Review Request: python-aaargh - An astonishingly awesome application argument helper Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: vkuzn...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://hadoop.ru/rpm/python-aaargh.spec SRPM URL: http://hadoop.ru/rpm/python-aaargh-0.7.1-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Aaargh is a Python module that makes building friendly command line applications really easy. Applications built with *Aaargh* provide a single executable with a subcommand for each exposed Python function. Each subcommand may have its own command line arguments. This is similar to the way version control systems provide multiple commands using a single entry point. Fedora Account System Username: vittyvk -- 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 1077301] Review Request: python-aaargh - An astonishingly awesome application argument helper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077301 Vitaly Kuznetsov vkuzn...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) 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 1036755] Review Request: python-httpretty - HTTP client mock for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036755 Miro Hrončok mhron...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(jlen...@redhat.co ||m) --- Comment #16 from Miro Hrončok mhron...@redhat.com --- Jamie, what's the status here, should I do the package, or you 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 1077268] Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077268 --- Comment #3 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com --- Thank you very much for the fast review :) Following spec/srpm should fix the issues. Spec URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML-addons.spec SRPM URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML-addons-0.2.1-3.fc20.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 1036755] Review Request: python-httpretty - HTTP client mock for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036755 --- Comment #17 from Dridi Boukelmoune dridi.boukelmo...@gmail.com --- Btw, even though is was originally a review swap with Miro, I'll continue the review anyway. So feel free to take it, you'd still have a reviewer. -- 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 1070941] Review Request: python-svgwrite - python library to create svg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070941 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 1070941] Review Request: python-svgwrite - python library to create svg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070941 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-svgwrite-1.1.3-4.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-svgwrite-1.1.3-4.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 1070941] Review Request: python-svgwrite - python library to create svg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070941 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-svgwrite-1.1.3-4.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-svgwrite-1.1.3-4.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 1070941] Review Request: python-svgwrite - python library to create svg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070941 --- Comment #21 from Julien Enselme juj...@jujens.eu --- I have successfully created the new package request. Everything seems good to me. If I understand correctly the next steps of the process, I have to wait for the package to be pushed in testing and then either for it to have a karma of 3 or 1 week to manually push it into stable. -- 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 1070946] Review Request: python-SimpleCV - Open source framework for building computer vision applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070946 --- Comment #3 from Julien Enselme juj...@jujens.eu --- SimpleCV provides tests. I tried to add a %check macro. But some tests are performed on non-free functionalities of OpenCV that are not packaged in Fedora. So the tests are compelled to fail. So I won't add the %check macro. -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-astroML-0.2-2.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 1077322] New: Review Request: nodejs-zlibjs - JavaScript library reimplementing compression, made available for Node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077322 Bug ID: 1077322 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-zlibjs - JavaScript library reimplementing compression, made available for Node.js Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jamieli...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/nodejs-zlibjs.spec SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/SRPMS/nodejs-zlibjs-0.2.0-1.fc21.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jamielinux Description: This module allows zlib.js to be used by other Node.js modules. zlib.js is ZLIB(RFC1950), DEFLATE(RFC1951), GZIP(RFC1952), and PKZIP implementation in JavaScript. This library can be used to perform compression and decompression in the browser. -- 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 1065446] Review Request: hive - Hadoop-compatible data warehouse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065446 Pete MacKinnon pmack...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2014-03-17 13:55:04 -- 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 1071456] Review Request: oozie - A work-flow scheduling system for Apache Hadoop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1071456 Bug 1071456 depends on bug 1065446, which changed state. Bug 1065446 Summary: Review Request: hive - Hadoop-compatible data warehouse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065446 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- 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 1077268] Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077268
Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[-]: 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:
Unknown or generated. 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/besser82/shared/fedora/review/1077268-python-
astroML-addons/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.
[-]: 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 20480 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]: 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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[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
[Bug 1024589] Review Request: zlib-js - JavaScript library reimplementing compression
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024589
Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1077322
--- Comment #7 from Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org ---
To paraphrase a discussion with T.C. via email:
What I thought was a working solution turns out to be not really working at
all. %{_arch} is the build host architecture not the target architecture, so if
an EPEL package is sent to a x86_64 builder then the nodejs-zlibjs subpackage
will be unconditionally present even in PPC repositories. And conversely, if
the package is sent to a PPC builder then the nodejs-zlibjs subpackage will be
unconditionally absent even in x86_64 repositories. The only solution with our
current buildsystem appears to be to make the package arched (remove BuildArch:
noarch, and use %ifarch for the subpackage).
I suggested instead that we split them into two completely separate packages
and symlink js-zlib/node-zlib.js to the nodejs-zlibjs package. This would
allow:
- js-zlib to remain completely free of architecture restrictions
- nodejs-zlibjs to be restricted to %{nodejs_arches}
- both packages to remain noarch
I have confirmed by running the test suite that the new nodejs-zlibjs package
works as intended with the symlink.
Review Request: nodejs-zlibjs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077322
Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/js-zlib.spec
SRPM URL:
http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/SRPMS/js-zlib-0.2.0-4.fc21.src.rpm
* Mon Mar 17 2014 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org - 0.2.0-4
- As it turns out, matching {_arch} won't solve our problem as it indicates
the architecture of the build host not the target architecture. Instead
split nodejs-zlibjs into a separate package, as otherwise js-zlib would be
restricted to {nodejs_arches}. bin/node-zlib.js will remain in the js-zlib
package, while nodejs-zlibjs will depend on js-zlib and have a symlink.
- add logic for building on EPEL 6
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077322
[Bug 1077322] Review Request: nodejs-zlibjs - JavaScript library
reimplementing compression, made available for Node.js
--
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 1077322] Review Request: nodejs-zlibjs - JavaScript library reimplementing compression, made available for Node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077322 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1024589 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024589 [Bug 1024589] Review Request: zlib-js - JavaScript library reimplementing compression -- 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 977137] Review Request: nodejs-zlib-browserify - Wrapper for zlib.js to allow for use in browsers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977137 Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|1024589 |1077322 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024589 [Bug 1024589] Review Request: zlib-js - JavaScript library reimplementing compression https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077322 [Bug 1077322] Review Request: nodejs-zlibjs - JavaScript library reimplementing compression, made available for Node.js -- 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
