[Bug 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 Robert Scheck red...@linuxnetz.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Robert Scheck red...@linuxnetz.de --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: lua-cyrussasl Short Description: Cyrus SASL library for Lua Upstream URL: https://github.com/JorjBauer/lua-cyrussasl Owners: robert Branches: f19 f20 f21 el5 el6 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1058090] Review Request: rpcalc - A reverse polish notation calculator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1058090 Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags|needinfo?(i...@cicku.me) | --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me --- BuildRequires: python3-PyQt4? Yes, as the install script will detect if it's available on the system. NEW SPEC URL: http://us-la.cicku.me/rpcalc.spec NEW SRPM URL: http://us-la.cicku.me/rpcalc-0.7.0-2.fc22.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 1020456] Review Request: vagrant - an automation tool used to manage development environments
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020456 Tadej Janež tadej.ja...@tadej.hicsalta.si changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tadej.janez@tadej.hicsalta. ||si --- Comment #12 from Tadej Janež tadej.ja...@tadej.hicsalta.si --- Hi Alex, any progress since April? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1058628] Review Request: linode-cli - Official command-line interface to the Linode platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1058628 --- Comment #2 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- License is ok Package needs a BuildArch: noarch entry Package builds ok http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7206026 Permissions for binaries need to be corrected. WebService::Linode is a bundled library and should be removed in %prep Christopher, there is no test suite, so not including most of the BRs will not cause a build failure. At any rate, here are all the extra BRs that are used by this package that i could find. perl(Carp) perl(Exporter) perl(Pod::Usage) perl(Sys::Hostname) perl(Term::ANSIColor) perl(lib) perl(parent) BR: perl(LWP::UserAgent) is not used at all and may be removed. BR: perl(Mozilla::CA) is not used at all and may be removed. rpmlint returns a weird license warning because it seems unable to parse Artistic or GPLv2 instead of GPLv2 or Artistic. You can correct this noise if you want. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1113915] Review Request: micropython - Implementation of Python 3 with very low memory footprint
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1113915 Matej Stuchlik mstuc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(i...@cicku.me) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1122381] Review Request: perl-File-ConfigDir - Get directories of configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122381 David Dick dd...@cpan.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- Thanks Christopher! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-File-ConfigDir Short Description: Get directories of configuration files Upstream URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/File-ConfigDir/ Owners: ddick Branches: f20, f21, el6, epel7 InitialCC: perl-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 1123336] Review Request: perl-MooX-File-ConfigDir - Moo eXtension for File::ConfigDir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123336 --- Comment #2 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- Okay. Fixed and uploaded. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124313] New: Review Request: perl-Path-ScanINC - Emulate Perls internal handling of @INC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124313 Bug ID: 1124313 Summary: Review Request: perl-Path-ScanINC - Emulate Perls internal handling of @INC 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: https://ddick.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Path-ScanINC.spec SRPM URL: https://ddick.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Path-ScanINC-1.00-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Emulate Perls internal handling of @INC 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
[Bug 1114212] Review Request: glite-lb-server - gLite Logging and Bookkeeping server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114212 Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me --- Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated = MUST items = C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: Apache (v2.0), Unknown or generated. 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck: Apache (v2.0) - glite-lb-server-3.0.18/interface/index.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/interface/lb_authz.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/interface/pretty_print_wrapper.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/interface/query.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/interface/srv_perf.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/interface/store.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/authz_policy.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/authz_policy.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/bkindex.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/bkserverd.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/cond_dump.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/cond_dump.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/db_calls.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/db_calls.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/db_store.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/db_supp.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/db_supp.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/dump.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/get_events.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/il_lbproxy.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/il_lbproxy.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/il_notification.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/il_notification.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/jobstat.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/jobstat.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/jobstat_supp.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_authz.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_html.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_html.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_http.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_http.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_proto.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_proto.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_rss.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_rss.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_text.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_text.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_xml_parse.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lb_xml_parse_V21.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/lcas_lb.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/load.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/mon-db.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/notif_match.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/notification.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/openserver.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/openserver.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/perftest_proxy.sh glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/pretty_print_wrapper.cpp glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/purge.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/query.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/request.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/seqcode.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/server_notification.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/server_state.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/server_state.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/srv_purge.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/stats.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/stats.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/stored_master.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/userjobs.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/write2rgma.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/ws_fault.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/ws_fault.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/ws_lb4agu.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/ws_query.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/ws_typemap.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/ws_typeref.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/test/test_query_events.cpp glite-lb-server-3.0.18/test/test_query_parse.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/test/test_soap_conv.cpp glite-lb-server-3.0.18/test/test_trans.sh Unknown or generated glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/crypto.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/crypto.h glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/server_stats.c glite-lb-server-3.0.18/src/server_stats.h [-]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/logrotate.d [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /var/spool/glite(glite-lb- logger), /etc/glite-lb(glite-lbjp-common-log), /var/lib/glite(glite-lb- logger, glite-px-proxyrenewal), /var/run/glite(glite-lb-logger), /var/spool/glite/lb-proxy(glite-lb-logger), /var/spool/glite/lb- locallogger(glite-lb-logger), /var/spool/glite/lb-notif(glite-lb-logger) [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. [x]: %config files
[Bug 1124313] Review Request: perl-Path-ScanINC - Emulate Perls internal handling of @INC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124313 --- Comment #1 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- koji builds rawhide at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7206231 f20 at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7206255 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1123689] Review Request: yadifa - Lightweight authoritative Name Server with DNSSEC capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123689 Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me --- Flags are not set correctly, please check your koji build.log. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1113915] Review Request: micropython - Implementation of Python 3 with very low memory footprint
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1113915 Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(i...@cicku.me) | --- Comment #7 from Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me --- I will finish this in today or tomorrow. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1113915] Review Request: micropython - Implementation of Python 3 with very low memory footprint
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1113915 --- Comment #8 from Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me --- 1. I don't think it's a good idea to remove O2 from the cflags, you should contact upstream. (Use V=1 and report the issues) 2. The summary of this package should be: Python for microcontrollers -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1113328] Review Request: python-ioflo - Flow Based Programming Automated Reasoning Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1113328
--- Comment #12 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com ---
Remove the line
%{_bindir}/%{srcname}
from the python3 package and check that the ioflo script is the one with
/usr/bin/python2 as the shebang
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117906] Review Request: python-scikit-image - Image processing in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117906
--- Comment #5 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #1)
No need for f20+:
%global __provides_exclude_from
^(%{python2_sitearch}|%{python3_sitearch})/.*\\.so$
Ok, I will remove it in the next SPEC
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117906] Review Request: python-scikit-image - Image processing in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117906 --- Comment #6 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Erik Johnson from comment #2) On which branches do you intend this to be built? Only in the latest Fedoras -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117906] Review Request: python-scikit-image - Image processing in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117906 --- Comment #7 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Erik Johnson from comment #3) Several rpmlint issues: python-scikit-image.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Unspecified python3-scikit-image.x86_64: W: python-bytecode-without-source /usr/lib64/python3.3/site-packages/skimage/io/tests/__pycache__/ test_plugin_util.cpython-33.pyo ... 513 more like the above ... scikit-image-tools.noarch: W: non-standard-group Unspecified python-scikit-image.src:104: E: files-attr-not-set python-scikit-image.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean python-scikit-image.src: W: no-buildroot-tag python-scikit-image.src: W: no-%clean-section It seems you are using an old version of rpmlint. Group is not needed in Rawhide. defattr, buildroot or %clean aren't needed also. Could you try the rpmlint in Fedora 20? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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|fedora-review? | |needinfo?(mhroncok@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 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||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117906] Review Request: python-scikit-image - Image processing in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117906
--- Comment #8 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Eduardo Mayorga from comment #4)
Some comments:
- It won't build in EPEL7 either as it doesn't ship Python 3, so you must
conditionalize for that branch too.
I don't plan to build in epel7 for the momemnt.
- The python3- subpackage's summary and description should explicitly state
it's a Python 3 module. For example:
%package -n python3-%{upname}
Summary: Image processing in Python
should be:
Summary: Image processing in Python 3
Are you sure? There is nothing in the guidelines about that. I haven't searched
through the entire python3 package collection, but using Python/Python3 seems
to be a matter of packager choice
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about 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 Whiteboard|NotReady| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117906] Review Request: python-scikit-image - Image processing in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117906 --- Comment #9 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-scikit-image.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-scikit-image-0.10.1-2.fc22.src.rpm Removed __provides_exclude_from -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #29 from Miro Hrončok mhron...@redhat.com ---
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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[-]: 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]: 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 61440 bytes in 4 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
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
[-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[-]: 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.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
Justified.
[?]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has
[Bug 1117112] Review Request: biblesync - A Cross-platform library for sharing Bible navigation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117112 Robert Lightfoot boblf...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||boblf...@gmail.com --- Comment #9 from Robert Lightfoot boblf...@gmail.com --- Please note that the upstream package builds a 1.0.2-2xi.rpm and I would recommend starting at 1.0.2-3 in your numbering or there may be confusion? Just an observation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1121924] Review Request: perl-Term-ANSIColor - Color screen output using ANSI escape sequences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121924 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org --- Comment #10 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org --- Surely this package is replacing a core perl module in both Fedora (where it is not sub-packaged from the main perl package) and RHEL (where replacing RHEL functionality is not allowed by EPEL guidelines)? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1121924] Review Request: perl-Term-ANSIColor - Color screen output using ANSI escape sequences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121924 --- Comment #11 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- It does appear so. What do i need to do to fix this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1121924] Review Request: perl-Term-ANSIColor - Color screen output using ANSI escape sequences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121924 --- Comment #12 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org --- It should be possible to coordinate with Petr/Jitka to get it sub-packaged in Fedora like any other dual-lived package. As for EPEL, I think you'll need to retire it; whilst it may get sub-packaged in EL-8 if Fedora does so, you're still not allowed to replace it. This will probably need a rel-eng ticket. Wait and see what Petr/Jitka have to say about Fedora first though, in case you need to retire that as well for some reason. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1121085] Review Request: rubygem-pundit - Object oriented authorization for Rails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121085 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com 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 1114212] Review Request: glite-lb-server - gLite Logging and Bookkeeping server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114212
--- Comment #3 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz ---
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #2)
[-]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/logrotate.d
I've added logrotate to requires yet.
1. Why so many 755 dirs? Can't 750 satisfy?
It looks like rpmlint is not happy about that:
glite-lb-server.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/glite 0750L
Do you think I should limit the permissions anyway? The files created by gLite
daemons in /var/spool/glite have 0600 permissions, so additional listing
permissions on directory couldn't be a problem...
2. install -m 0644 ChangeLog LICENSE %{buildroot}%{_pkgdocdir}
Why not %doc?
It is due to EPEL support. There is something installed in /usr/share/doc
already by 'make install' and EPEL 6 doesn't handle combination of already
existing files and %doc very well.
3. Missing Requires(pre): shadow-utils
Good catch.
Hint: make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} = %make_install
F21+ make %{?_smp_mflags} = %make_build
I would rather keep the old-school chatty version here. :-) It is also needed
for EPEL 5.
New version:
Spec URL:
http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/glite-lb-server-3.0.18-2/glite-lb-server.spec
SRPM URL:
http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/glite-lb-server-3.0.18-2/glite-lb-server-3.0.18-2.fc22.src.rpm
* Tue Jul 29 2014 František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz - 3.0.18-2
- Added logrotate and shadow-utils requires
- Minimal requirements for glite-lbjp-common-server-bones not needed in EPEL
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 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 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 --- 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 1121085] Review Request: rubygem-pundit - Object oriented authorization for Rails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121085 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 1121085] Review Request: rubygem-pundit - Object oriented authorization for Rails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121085 --- 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 1122381] Review Request: perl-File-ConfigDir - Get directories of configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122381 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 1122381] Review Request: perl-File-ConfigDir - Get directories of configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122381 --- 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 975266] Review Request: cmap-japan - Japanese character mapping resources from Adobe's cmap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975266
Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ti...@math.uh.edu |lkund...@v3.sk
--- Comment #8 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk ---
Stealing this from Jason since he does not respond.
0.) The package naming and versioning
As you pointed out, the number in the file name is not a version. The package
should be named cmap-japan1-6; the question what to take for the version
remains open (as only the mappings themselves seem to be versioned separately).
I suggest you either contact upstream and ask for their advice on
packaging/versioning, or use the modification date, such as 20120814 or
2012.08.14 for version.
1.) I'm not sure you need to include the two documentation files
Licensing information is embedded in the files themselves and these two files
seem to change upstream; we'd need to figure out how to package them then.
2.) This is unnecessary:
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/cmap/%{name}-%{version}
3.) These belong in %prep (unless you decide to drop them as I suggested):
mkdir _tmpdoc
install -p -m0644 %SOURCE1 %SOURCE2 _tmpdoc
Also, rm -rf _tmpdoc is unnecessary.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1121924] Review Request: perl-Term-ANSIColor - Color screen output using ANSI escape sequences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121924 --- Comment #13 from Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com --- I'll create the sub-package at Fedora 21 and Fedora rawhide. Could you retired f20 branch and remove perl-Term-ANSIColor-4.03-1.fc20 update? The module is provided by perl, so it should not cause any problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948757] Review Request: python-whoosh - Fast, pure-Python full text indexing, search, and spell checking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948757 Robert Kuska rku...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Robert Kuska rku...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-whoosh New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: rkuska 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 948757] Review Request: python-whoosh - Fast, pure-Python full text indexing, search, and spell checking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948757 --- Comment #14 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 948757] Review Request: python-whoosh - Fast, pure-Python full text indexing, search, and spell checking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948757 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 1091483] Review Request: python-pyprintr - Module that allows to emulate the print_r() PHP function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091483 Eduardo Mayorga e...@mayorgalinux.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Eduardo Mayorga e...@mayorgalinux.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-pyprintr Short Description: Module that allows to emulate the print_r() PHP function Upstream URL: http://www.python-printr.org/ Owners: mayorga Branches: f20 f21 el6 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1123336] Review Request: perl-MooX-File-ConfigDir - Moo eXtension for File::ConfigDir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123336 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- Ok, looks good, File::ConfigDir approved, builds fine. Approving. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124313] Review Request: perl-Path-ScanINC - Emulate Perls internal handling of @INC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124313 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124313] Review Request: perl-Path-ScanINC - Emulate Perls internal handling of @INC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124313 --- Comment #2 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- FIX: Run-require Data::Dump -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124482] New: Review Request: amprd - An user-space IPIP encapsulation daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124482 Bug ID: 1124482 Summary: Review Request: amprd - An user-space IPIP encapsulation daemon for the ampr network Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jskar...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/amprd/amprd.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/amprd/amprd-1.4-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: An user-space IPIP encapsulation daemon with automatic RIPv2 multicast processing and multiple tunnel support for the ampr network. All RIPv2 processing, encapsulation, decapsulation and routing happens inside the daemon and it offers one or more virtual TUN interfaces to the system for your 44net traffic. Fedora Account System Username: jskarvad -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124482] Review Request: amprd - An user-space IPIP encapsulation daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124482 Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124483] Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124483 Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124483] New: Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124483 Bug ID: 1124483 Summary: Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jskar...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/ampr-ripd/ampr-ripd.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/ampr-ripd/ampr-ripd-1.11-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Routing daemon written in C similar to Hessu's rip44d including optional resending of RIPv2 broadcasts for router injection. Fedora Account System Username: jskarvad -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1091483] Review Request: python-pyprintr - Module that allows to emulate the print_r() PHP function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091483 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 1091483] Review Request: python-pyprintr - Module that allows to emulate the print_r() PHP function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091483 --- 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 1118267] Review Request: aces_container - ACES Container Reference
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1118267 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com --- rpmlint only shows: $ rpmlint -i ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/aces_container*.rpm aces_container-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. Koji scratch build on rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7210178 This package is need in order to update CTL and OpenEXR_CTL to current version. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1113712] Review Request: lua-bitop - C extension module for Lua 5.1/5.2 which adds bitwise operations on numbers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1113712 --- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com --- * Tue Jul 29 2014 - Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com - 1.0.2-2 - Drop BuildRoot - Wrap description Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/lua-bitop.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/lua-bitop-1.0.2-2.fc20.src.rpm If that's not sufficient, I'm afraid you'll need to be more specific. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1091483] Review Request: python-pyprintr - Module that allows to emulate the print_r() PHP function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091483 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-pyprintr-1.0-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pyprintr-1.0-2.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1091483] Review Request: python-pyprintr - Module that allows to emulate the print_r() PHP function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091483 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1103420] Review Request: autowrap - Generates Python Extension modules from [Cython] PXD files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103420 Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|bjoern.es...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flags|fedora-review? | |needinfo?(bjoern.esser@gmai | |l.com) | --- Comment #11 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com --- Björn seems too busy in this time. I thank him in any case. I set fedora‑review flag to empty. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1102858] Review Request: python-repoze-sphinx-autointerface - Auto-generate Sphinx API docs from Zope interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102858 Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|anto.tra...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124543] New: Review Request: mingw-admesh - MinGW compiled ADMesh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124543 Bug ID: 1124543 Summary: Review Request: mingw-admesh - MinGW compiled ADMesh Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mhron...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hroncok/SPECS/master/mingw-admesh.spec SRPM URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/mingw-admesh-0.98.0-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: MinGW compiled ADMesh. ADMesh is a program for diagnosing and/or repairing commonly encountered problems with STL (STereo Lithography) data files. Fedora Account System Username: churchyard -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 975266] Review Request: cmap-japan - Japanese character mapping resources from Adobe's cmap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975266 --- Comment #9 from Ben Rosser rosser@gmail.com --- I have gotten rid of all the documentation, as suggested. I've changed the version to 2012.08.14; that seems reasonable enough. I also changed the package name to cmap-japan1-6. Should I retroactively update the changelog to use the right versioning? I did, but I'm not completely confident it was the right thing to do. Spec URL: http://mars.arosser.com/fedora/cmap/cmap-japan1-6.spec SRPM URL: http://mars.arosser.com/fedora/cmap/cmap-japan1-6-2012.08.14-4.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 1103420] Review Request: autowrap - Generates Python Extension modules from [Cython] PXD files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103420 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||loganje...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #12 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com --- I will take this 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 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 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 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.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 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.el5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.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 1102098] Review Request: lua-cyrussasl - Cyrus SASL library for Lua
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102098 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lua-cyrussasl-1.0.0-1.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 1115689] Review Request: nodejs-lodash-isfunction - The Lo-Dash function `_.isFunction` as a Node.js module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1115689 Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1124185 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124185 [Bug 1124185] nodejs-xmlbuilder-2.3.0 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 1115681] Review Request: nodejs-lodash-assign - The Lo-Dash function _.assign as a Node.js module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1115681 Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1124185 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124185 [Bug 1124185] nodejs-xmlbuilder-2.3.0 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 1115691] Review Request: nodejs-lodash-isobject - The Lo-Dash function `_.isObject` as a Node.js module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1115691 Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1124185 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124185 [Bug 1124185] nodejs-xmlbuilder-2.3.0 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 1124552] New: Review Request: python-admesh - Python bindings for ADMesh, STL maipulation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124552 Bug ID: 1124552 Summary: Review Request: python-admesh - Python bindings for ADMesh, STL maipulation library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mhron...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hroncok/SPECS/master/python-admesh.spec SRPM URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-admesh-0.98-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: This module provides bindings for the ADMesh library. It lets you manipulate 3D models in binary or ASCII STL format and partially repair them if necessary. Fedora Account System Username: churchyard -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124313] Review Request: perl-Path-ScanINC - Emulate Perls internal handling of @INC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124313 --- Comment #3 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- Done -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 676308] Review Request: rubygem-net-scp - A pure Ruby implementation of the SCP client protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676308 Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tdaw...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rubygem-net-scp New Branches: epel7 Owners: tdawson -- 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 602348] Review Request: rubygem-net-ssh - A Ruby ssh client library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602348 Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tdaw...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rubygem-net-ssh New Branches: epel7 Owners: tdawson -- 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 743007] Review Request: rubygem-introspection - Dynamic inspection of the hierarchy of method definitions on a Ruby object
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743007 Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tdaw...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rubygem-introspection New Branches: epel7 Owners: tdawson -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1123336] Review Request: perl-MooX-File-ConfigDir - Moo eXtension for File::ConfigDir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123336 David Dick dd...@cpan.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- Thanks Petr. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-MooX-File-ConfigDir Short Description: Moo eXtension for File::ConfigDir Upstream URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/MooX-File-ConfigDir/ Owners: ddick Branches: f20, f21, el6, epel7 InitialCC: perl-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 1121924] Review Request: perl-Term-ANSIColor - Color screen output using ANSI escape sequences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121924 --- Comment #14 from David Dick dd...@cpan.org --- Okay. Would be happy to retire it totally if that's easier for you. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124070] Review Request: pcaro-hermit-fonts - Monospace fonts for programming
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124070 David Gay oddsho...@riseup.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||oddsho...@riseup.net --- Comment #1 from David Gay oddsho...@riseup.net --- Tested and working on Fedora 20 x86_64. Awesome stuff! :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 602348] Review Request: rubygem-net-ssh - A Ruby ssh client library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602348 --- Comment #17 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 602348] Review Request: rubygem-net-ssh - A Ruby ssh client library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602348 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 676308] Review Request: rubygem-net-scp - A pure Ruby implementation of the SCP client protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676308 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 743007] Review Request: rubygem-introspection - Dynamic inspection of the hierarchy of method definitions on a Ruby object
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743007 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 676308] Review Request: rubygem-net-scp - A pure Ruby implementation of the SCP client protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676308 --- Comment #17 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 743007] Review Request: rubygem-introspection - Dynamic inspection of the hierarchy of method definitions on a Ruby object
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743007 --- 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 1123336] Review Request: perl-MooX-File-ConfigDir - Moo eXtension for File::ConfigDir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123336 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 1123336] Review Request: perl-MooX-File-ConfigDir - Moo eXtension for File::ConfigDir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123336 --- 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 1122381] Review Request: perl-File-ConfigDir - Get directories of configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122381 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 1122381] Review Request: perl-File-ConfigDir - Get directories of configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122381 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-File-ConfigDir-0.013-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-File-ConfigDir-0.013-1.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 1122381] Review Request: perl-File-ConfigDir - Get directories of configuration files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122381 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-File-ConfigDir-0.013-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-File-ConfigDir-0.013-1.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 948855] Review Request: perl-Getopt-Long - Extended processing of command line options
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948855 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Getopt-Long New Branches: el5 Owners: spot ppisar jplesnik psabata InitialCC: perl-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 1102858] Review Request: python-repoze-sphinx-autointerface - Auto-generate Sphinx API docs from Zope interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102858
--- Comment #8 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com ---
- This package seems licensed with a BSD (modification variant
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:BSD?rd=Licensing/BSD#Modification_Variant)
Can you confirm ?
- Your package owns /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/repoze
and /usr/lib/python3.3/site-packages/repoze directories; they are co-owned
by other packages not required.
Your package does not own directories created
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/repoze/sphinx
/usr/lib/python3.3/site-packages/repoze/sphinx
Please, explicit files/directories lists in '%files'.
- %if 0%{?fedora} = 12 || 0%{?rhel} = 8
RHEL 8 ?
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[?]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Unknown or generated. 8 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1102858-python-repoze-sphinx-
autointerface/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: 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/repoze(python-repoze-what-plugins-sql, python-repoze-what,
python-repoze-who-friendlyform, python-repoze-who-plugins-sa, python-
repoze-who-testutil, python-repoze-what-pylons, python-repoze-tm2)
[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]: 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 8 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[-]: 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]: 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.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[ ]: 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]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
[Bug 1123511] Review Request: nanomsg - A fast, scalable, and easy to use socket library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123511 --- Comment #4 from Japheth Cleaver cleaver-red...@terabithia.org --- Based on http://www.freelists.org/post/nanomsg/Brief-introduction-and-pkgconfig-vs-SONAME-question,4 and (e.g.) http://blog.asleson.org/index.php/2014/07/08/libtool-library-versioning-version-info-currentrevisionage/, this seems to be the expected (if slightly lexicographically confusing) behavior. The ABI has not had anything deprecated yet, so it's still at SONAME 0. Package release version is unrelated. Any other issues seen with this 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 1079640] Review Request: rubygem-json_spec - Easily handle JSON in RSpec and Cucumber
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079640 --- Comment #5 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz --- Spec URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/rubygem-json_spec-1.1.2-1b/rubygem-json_spec.spec SRPM URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/rubygem-json_spec-1.1.2-1b/rubygem-json_spec-1.1.2-1.fc22.src.rpm koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7211557 * removed ruby(release) BR * removing developer-only files sooner in %prep (they won't be there during tests), %exclude only files needed for tests -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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
--- Comment #13 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com ---
Issues:
1. The package Requires are not right. The Requires that should be in the
python3 subpackage are in the main package instead. But the Requires
declaration for the python3 subpackage under %package -n python3-autowrap.
2. Having said that, why are python2-devel/python3-devel needed? I can see
the need for Cython and boost-devel, but why pythonX-devel?
3. I am not convinced that this package should be archful. What can go wrong
if it is noarch? Also, rpmdiff shows that the only differences between
i386 and x86_64 builds are in the byte compiled python files, which is
probably just timestamp differences. So if something can go wrong if the
package is noarch, then I believe that same thing will go wrong with the
package as it is currently constituted. (Note also that the files are
installed in %{pythonX_sitelib}, which is for non-arch-specific modules;
they would go in %{pythonX_sitearch} otherwise.)
4. I question the usefulness of including CONCEPT and README_DEVELOP in %doc.
Those do not seem to provide any information that users of this package
will need.
5. The entry %{__python3}-autowrap in the python3 %files section is, in my
opinion, an abuse of the %{__python3} macro. Please change that to read
%{_bindir}/python3-autowrap.
6. What is the purpose of the find ... | sed ... invocations in %prep? As
far as I can see, they do exactly nothing.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 10 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package 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
[Bug 1036755] Review Request: python-httpretty - HTTP client mock for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036755 Jamie Lennox jlen...@redhat.com 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 693137] Review Request: python-ffc - A compiler for finite element variational forms
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693137 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com --- I had already started to bring the Fenics stack into Fedora. See the Fenics tracker bug I had created for progress: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820660 At a certain point I became discouraged due to lack of reviewers, and lack of responsivity to my reviews of components others had submitted. But the work done is still all availble for anyone to pick up, and I'll help as time allows. I found upstream very responsive to issues I raised which came up during packaging. -- 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 1102858] Review Request: python-repoze-sphinx-autointerface - Auto-generate Sphinx API docs from Zope interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1102858
--- Comment #9 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #8)
- This package seems licensed with a BSD (modification variant
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:BSD?rd=Licensing/
BSD#Modification_Variant)
Can you confirm ?
Yes, that is correct. Since this is not one of the BSD variants that requires
a distinct License tag (such as BSD with advertising), the license tag is
just BSD anyway.
- Your package owns /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/repoze
and /usr/lib/python3.3/site-packages/repoze directories; they are co-owned
by other packages not required.
It is true that other packages own those directories, too, but this package can
be installed without any of those other packages. Therefore, this package must
also own those directories.
Your package does not own directories created
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/repoze/sphinx
/usr/lib/python3.3/site-packages/repoze/sphinx
Please, explicit files/directories lists in '%files'.
Not needed, since the parent directories, and everything they contain, are
already owned.
- %if 0%{?fedora} = 12 || 0%{?rhel} = 8
RHEL 8 ?
This was requested by the original reviewer. See the attachment in comment 1.
It doesn't matter much to me, frankly, but this does offer a bit of
future-proofing, since python3 support is likely to appear in RHEL 8.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 820660] Review Request: FEniCS - tracker bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820660 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com --- Components: python-ufc: BZ #820659 python-viper: BZ #903285 python-ffc: BZ #693137 python-ufl: BZ #799702 python-instant: BZ #483496 python-fiat: BZ #483501 dolfin: BZ #821727 -- 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 1036755] Review Request: python-httpretty - HTTP client mock for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036755 --- Comment #30 from Jamie Lennox jlen...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-httpretty Short Description: HTTP request mock tool for Python Upstream URL: http://falcao.it/HTTPretty/ Owners: jamielennox Branches: f19 f20 f21 epel7 InitialCC: apevec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1086790] Review Request: gnudos - A GNU library to help new users of the GNU system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1086790 --- Comment #16 from Mohammed Isam mohammed_isam1...@yahoo.com --- Spec URL: http://sites.google.com/site/mohammedisam2000/home/projects/gnudos.spec SRPM URL: http://sites.google.com/site/mohammedisam2000/home/projects/gnudos-1.4-1.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 1122577] Review Request: git-xcleaner - TUI interface for git branch removal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122577 Fabio Alessandro Locati fabioloc...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fabioloc...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1062942] Review Request: perl-App-CSV - The CSV command line Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062942 --- Comment #25 from Fabio Alessandro Locati fabioloc...@gmail.com --- Thank you Jon for sponsoring me as a Fedora packager :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1062942] Review Request: perl-App-CSV - The CSV command line Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062942 Fabio Alessandro Locati fabioloc...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Fabio Alessandro Locati fabioloc...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-App-CSV Short Description: App::CSV Perl module Upstream URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/App-CSV/ Owners: fale Branches: f19 f20 f21 el6 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
