[Bug 1103554] Review Request: CppCMS - a Free High Performance Web Development Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103554 Ralf Corsepius changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #4 from Ralf Corsepius --- This package has lot of issues. I do not want to sound too negative, but I fear it'll be a long and tiresome process to get this package into Fedora. Let start with pointing out a few selected issues. 1. Packaging: Please properly split the package into and *-devel subpackages: - *.so.* belong into *-devel unless they are dlopened by name. - man3/ are devel doc and therefore belong into *-devel. - *.a are not supposed to be shipped in Fedora at all. - Please be more selective in %files sections. The way you have written them is very sensitive to accidentially picking up files a package is not supposed to contain (cf. *devel vs. ). 2. Contents: - Most of the man3/* manpages are junk and are likely to conflict with other packages. - The *-doc package contains a lot of files which are not supposed to be shipped. 3. Bundled libraries: This package bundles quite a number of sources from other origins (boost, json2*.js, sha1, etc.). Please modify the package to use external versions whenever 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 1103554] Review Request: CppCMS - a Free High Performance Web Development Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103554 --- Comment #3 from raph...@web.de --- Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6916686 -- 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 1103554] Review Request: CppCMS - a Free High Performance Web Development Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103554 raph...@web.de changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: cppcms - a |Review Request: CppCMS - a |Free High Performance Web |Free High Performance Web |Development Framework |Development Framework -- 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 1103554] Review Request: cppcms - a Free High Performance Web Development Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103554 --- Comment #2 from raph...@web.de --- Not sure about: 1) %prep: Should I patch Doxyfile or provide my complete own one? Upstream seems to use an outdated format of the file. 2) %check: Two tests fail on my local system. So I decided to comment that. 3) %files doc: Do we need latex files, e.g. for pdf generation? I included manpages instead into the main 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 1103554] Review Request: cppcms - a Free High Performance Web Development Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103554 --- Comment #1 from raph...@web.de --- Created attachment 901321 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=901321&action=edit $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/cppcms.spec rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/cppcms-* -- 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 1103555] New: Review Request: fcl - The Flexible Collision Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103555 Bug ID: 1103555 Summary: Review Request: fcl - The Flexible Collision Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: richmat...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl-0.3.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: FCL is a library for performing three types of proximity queries on a pair of geometric models composed of triangles. * Collision detection: detecting whether the two models overlap, and optionally, all of the triangles that overlap. * Distance computation: computing the minimum distance between a pair of models, i.e., the distance between the closest pair of points. * Tolerance verification: determining whether two models are closer or farther than a tolerance distance. * Continuous collision detection: detecting whether the two moving models overlap during the movement, and optionally, the time of contact. * Contact information: for collision detection and continuous collision detection, the contact information (including contact normals and contact points) can be returned optionally. Fedora Account System Username: rmattes rpmlint: rpmlint ./fcl.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/fcl-* fcl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals fcl.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libfcl.so libfcl.so fcl.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libfcl.so exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 fcl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings. scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6916717 -- 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 1103554] New: Review Request: cppcms - a Free High Performance Web Development Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103554 Bug ID: 1103554 Summary: Review Request: cppcms - a Free High Performance Web Development Framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: projects...@smart.ms QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/cppcms/cppcms.spec SRPM URL: http://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/cppcms/cppcms-1.0.4-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: CppCMS is a Free High Performance Web Development Framework (not a CMS) aimed at Rapid Web Application Development. It differs from most other web development frameworks like: Python Django, Java Servlets. Fedora Account System Username: raphgro -- 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 1103543] Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103543 Mathieu Bridon changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1103543] Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103543 --- Comment #5 from Mathieu Bridon --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-pyramid-chameleon Short Description: Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework Upstream URL: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pyramid_chameleon Owners: bochecha lmacken Branches: devel 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 1103543] Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103543 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi --- ok. It turns out those byte compile errors were some weird issue with my test system. :( Doing a clean scratch build and they don't show up (even with the first revision). So, this package is APPROVED, but please use the -1 reversion, there's no need to mess with byte compile as in the -2 one. Sorry about that. -- 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 1103543] Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103543 --- Comment #3 from Mathieu Bridon --- (In reply to Kevin Fenzi from comment #2) > Issues: > > 1. There's a bytecompile issue, it looks like it's using python2 to > bytecompile the python3 .py's. See: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging: > Python#Bytecompiling_with_the_correct_python_version Fixed. > 2. Might ask upstream to include a copy of the license. (non blocker) https://github.com/Pylons/pyramid_chameleon/pull/9 - Spec URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-pyramid-chameleon.spec SRPM URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-pyramid-chameleon-0.1-2.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 1103543] Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103543
--- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi ---
Issues:
1. There's a bytecompile issue, it looks like it's using python2 to
bytecompile the python3 .py's. See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Bytecompiling_with_the_correct_python_version
2. Might ask upstream to include a copy of the license. (non blocker)
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[-]: 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". 14 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/fedora/kevin/1103543-python-pyramid-
chameleon/licensecheck.txt
[-]: 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
[-]: 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.
[-]: 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 6 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3
-pyramid-chameleon
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Pa
[Bug 1103543] Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103543 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ke...@scrye.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi --- Look for a full review in a few... -- 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 1103545] Review Request: granite - GTK extensions for the elementary desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103545 Wesley Hearn changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1068850 (Pantheon) CC||tingp...@tingping.se --- Comment #1 from Wesley Hearn --- *** Bug 998483 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1068850 [Bug 1068850] Fedora 22 Change "Pantheon Desktop" 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 998483] Review Request: granite - GTK extensions for elementary applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998483 Wesley Hearn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2014-06-01 19:28:42 --- Comment #13 from Wesley Hearn --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1103545 *** -- 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 1103545] New: Review Request: granite - GTK extensions for the elementary desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103545 Bug ID: 1103545 Summary: Review Request: granite - GTK extensions for the elementary desktop Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: whe...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://jknife.fedorapeople.org/review/granite/granite.spec SRPM URL: http://jknife.fedorapeople.org/review/granite/granite-0.2.3.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Granite is an extension of GTK. Among other things, it provides the custom widgets used in elementary apps. Fedora Account System Username: jknife $ rpmlint ./granite*.rpm granite-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation granite-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary granite-demo 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. no-manual-page-for-binary: https://bugs.launchpad.net/granite/+bug/1281294 -- 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 1103543] New: Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103543 Bug ID: 1103543 Summary: Review Request: python-pyramid-chameleon - Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: boche...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-pyramid-chameleon.spec SRPM URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-pyramid-chameleon-0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Bindings for the Chameleon templating system in the Pyramid web framework. Fedora Account System Username: bochecha -- 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 1103420] Review Request: autowrap - Generates Python Extension modules from [Cython] PXD files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103420 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: autowrap - |python-autowrap - Generates |Generates Python Extension |Python Extension modules|modules from [Cython] PXD |from [Cython] PXD files |files --- Comment #4 from Antonio Trande --- My approach with this package has been vague. Now it should be better. SPEC: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/python-autowrap/autowrap.spec SRPM: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/python-autowrap/autowrap-0.4.0-2.20140321git26e901.fc20.src.rpm - Fixed License - Fixed Requires package for python2/python3 - Excluded 'tests' directories by packaging - Performing building operations to packaging independent Python3 module - Disabled generation of the useless debuginfo 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 723966] Review Request: python-wtforms - Forms validation and rendering library for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=723966 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-wtforms-2.0-1.fc20 |python-wtforms-2.0-1.fc19 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-wtforms-2.0-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 1034523] Review Request: sqlcli - a tool for running sql queries from the command line using sqlalchemy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1034523 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||sqlcli-2-4.fc20 Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System --- sqlcli-2-4.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 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 723966] Review Request: python-wtforms - Forms validation and rendering library for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=723966 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||python-wtforms-2.0-1.fc20 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-wtforms-2.0-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 1089425] Review Request: keepass - Password manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1089425 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||keepass-2.26-8.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-06-01 18:21:53 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- keepass-2.26-8.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 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 1076976] Review Request: rubygem-settingslogic - Simple settings solution for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076976 --- Comment #2 from František Dvořák --- Spec URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/rubygem-settingslogic-2.0.9-2/rubygem-settingslogic.spec SRPM URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/rubygem-settingslogic-2.0.9-2/rubygem-settingslogic-2.0.9-2.fc21.src.rpm koji build: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/rubygem-settingslogic-2.0.9-2/rubygem-settingslogic-2.0.9-2.fc21.src.rpm * Update BR/R for EPEL and Fedora >= 21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1103539] New: Review Request: drupal7-email - This module provides a field type for email addresses
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103539 Bug ID: 1103539 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-email - This module provides a field type for email addresses Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: peter.bo...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-email.spec SRPM URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-email-1.3-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: This module provides a field type for email addresses. Fedora Account System Username: asrob koji url: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6916416 rpmlint output: $ rpmlint drupal7-email.spec ~/Downloads/drupal7-email-1.3-1.fc21.src.rpm 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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 1066707] Review Request: libwfd - A stand-alone implementation of the Wifi-Display protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066707 Peter Robinson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed||2014-06-01 14:51:29 --- Comment #2 from Peter Robinson --- No longer needed for the project I want to package and I believe no longer being developed. -- 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 1060920] Review Request: openni2 - OpenNI libraries for 3D-sensing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1060920 Bug 1060920 depends on bug 1094787, which changed state. Bug 1094787 Summary: kinect drivers path for openni https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1094787 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 1039315] Review Request: nuvolaplayer - Cloud Music Integration for your Linux Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1039315 --- Comment #41 from MartinKG --- Spec URL: http://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/nuvolaplayer.spec SRPM URL: http://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/nuvolaplayer-2.4.0-1.fc20.src.rpm %changelog %changelog * Sun Jun 01 2014 Martin Gansser - 2.4.0-1 - Update to 2.4.0 -- 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 173040] Review Request: rlog - Runtime Logging for C++
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=173040 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1098472 CC||mic...@michel-slm.name --- Comment #23 from Peter Lemenkov --- *** Bug 1098460 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1098472 [Bug 1098472] RFE: epel7 branch for cryptkeeper -- 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 173040] Review Request: rlog - Runtime Logging for C++
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=173040 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Peter Lemenkov --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rlog New Branches: epel7 Owners: salimma InitialCC: -- 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 1092431] Review Request: nanodesigner - 3D molecular editor and simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1092431 --- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt --- > http://openlabs.cc/nanodesigner/Nanodesigner.spec That spec file is very unusual, because it builds a package that only includes two %doc files: | %files | %doc README COPYING Have you done a test-build of this packge yet? With Mock or in koji (by following the "Join" process: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers ). Also consider pointing the fedora-review tool at this ticket. Run "fedora-review -b 1092431" and let it perform many helpful checks on your package(s). Keep the "Spec URL:" and "SRPM URL:" lines accurate, since the fedora-review tool downloads the files from those URLs. -- 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 974725] Review Request: ghc-pretty-show - Tools for working with derived Show instances and generic inspection of values
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=974725 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||maths...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(maths...@gmail.co ||m) -- 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 1083838] Review Request: nodejs-gzip-js - JavaScript library reimplementing gzip, made available for Node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1083838 --- Comment #2 from Tom Hughes --- We're waiting on action on some of the dependent bugs - basically there are three related modules here, each of which has been split into two review requests (one for the pure js part and one for the Node.js part) but all three need to be merged as there should only be one source package for each. I've taken all six reviews and made comments explaining what needs to be done and we're waiting on Zbigniew to have time to deal with the 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 974725] Review Request: ghc-pretty-show - Tools for working with derived Show instances and generic inspection of values
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=974725 --- Comment #5 from Jens Petersen --- How about remove jquery from now from the package until it is packaged? This is need for updating hledger which currently blocks ghc-7.8. -- 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 1083838] Review Request: nodejs-gzip-js - JavaScript library reimplementing gzip, made available for Node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1083838 --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen --- 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 1103420] Review Request: python-autowrap - Generates Python Extension modules from [Cython] PXD files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103420
--- Comment #3 from Björn "besser82" Esser ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
= 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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"Unknown or generated". 47 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/besser82/shared/fedora/review/1103420-python-
autowrap/licensecheck.txt
---> please ask upstream to prepend the actual license to the
source-files.
did you even read the LICENSE-file *BEFORE* packaging?!?
License: GPLv3+ (spec) vs. License: BSD (LICENSE-file in src)
Please refer to the process mentioned in:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.4, /usr/lib/python3.4/site-
packages
---> owned on rawhide by python3-pkg. false positive!
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.4
---> owned on rawhide by python3-pkg. false positive!
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-
packages/tests(python-libturpial, python-django-federated-login)
---> are the files in %{pythonX_sitelib}/tests even needed at runtime?
do they serve any special purpose? from my findings they are just
useless clutter, because those are just a small excerpt from what
is contained in the tarball's tests-dir.
Double-check and use %exclude if appropriate, please!
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[?]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
---> there are some devel-files located in
%{pythonX_sitelib}/autowrap/data_files, but they are needed for
the intended use of the 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.
[?]: 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.
---> according to files located in
%{pythonX_sitelib}/autowrap/data_files there is at least
boost-devel needed, even at runtime of the package. Because
the wrapper makes heavy use of boost's shared_ptr / smart_ptr.
In conclusion to the way the package is meant to work the list
of the minmal needed requires is:
Requires: pythonX-devel, (python3-)Cython, boost-devel
[!]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
---> spec-file has issues, refering to the packaging guidelines
for Python-packages.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[?]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 10 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
---> severe 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]: 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
[Bug 902086] Review request: Elasticsearch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902086 Björn "besser82" Esser changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Comment #21 from Björn "besser82" Esser --- If there is someone needed to get the missings dependencies reviewed, you can ping me directly and I'll take care of it. -- 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 1062757] Review Request: glite-lb-logger-msg - Plugin for sending L&B notifications to messaging infrastructure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062757 --- Comment #1 from František Dvořák --- Spec URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/glite-lb-logger-msg-1.2.12-1/glite-lb-logger-msg.spec SRPM URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/glite-lb-logger-msg-1.2.12-1/glite-lb-logger-msg-1.2.12-1.fc21.src.rpm koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6915600 * New release 1.2.12 (gLite L&B 4.1.1) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1103466] Review Request: perl-Net-Statsd - Sends statistics to the stats daemon over UDP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103466 --- Comment #1 from David Dick --- koji builds el6 at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6915477 rawhide at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6915479 -- 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 1103466] New: Review Request: perl-Net-Statsd - Sends statistics to the stats daemon over UDP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103466 Bug ID: 1103466 Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-Statsd - Sends statistics to the stats daemon over UDP Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dd...@cpan.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://ddick.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Net-Statsd.spec SRPM URL: http://ddick.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Net-Statsd-0.08-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Sends statistics to the stats daemon over UDP Fedora Account System Username: ddick -- 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
