[Bug 759712] Review Request: dragonegg - GCC plugin to use LLVM optimizers and code generators
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759712 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- dragonegg-3.4-1.el7.2 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dragonegg-3.4-1.el7.2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135519] Review Request: kio-extras - Additional components to increase the functionality of KIO Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135519 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||i...@cicku.me --- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng --- What about taking this occasion to rename doc package from -docs to -doc? As from review template in fedora-review, doc packages should have a common name -doc... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835
--- Comment #19 from Christopher Meng ---
(In reply to David Parsons from comment #18)
> (In reply to Pierre-YvesChibon from comment #16)
> > (In reply to David Parsons from comment #10)
> > > As for point 3. I had read this:
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Libexecdir (files in
> > > lib
> > > are indeed "executable programs that are designed primarily to be run by
> > > other programs rather than by users") but hadn't actually grasped that
> > > %{_libdir} would be /usr/lib64 on X86_64.
> >
> > If the files in %{_libexecdir} are meant to be executed but not by the user,
> > then my thoughts are that this folder is appropriate and I don't see the
> > need to move them to %{_libdir}.
> > If the files are not meant to be executed, then we should look into putting
> > them in %{_libdir}
>
> The files are indeed meant to be executed by a program (not directly by the
> user). However, they are not in %{_libexecdir} but in %{_prefix}/lib. This
> conforms to FHS and debian packaging guidelines but apparently not quite to
> fedora's...
Each project has its own way to handle files. And I don't agree with Debian all
the time.
> Would it be as simple as adding "mv %{_prefix}/lib %{_libexecdir}" somewhere?
You can try and checkout to see if it works as its default behavior. Putting
something in /usr/lib directly is the fault from upstream as they don't eithor
respect the libdir parameter which could be defined during CMake or take into
account of /lib64 on some OS, e.g Fedora, RHEL.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about 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 #56 from Christopher Meng --- 1. Drop unique, it's not needed since 2.0, not sure why you added(fault?)? 2. FTBFS: Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.wKqPtm + umask 022 + cd /builddir/build/BUILD + cd nuvolaplayer-2.4.2 + export RSVG=/usr/bin/rsvg-convert + RSVG=/usr/bin/rsvg-convert + waf configure --prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib --no-unity-quick-list --no-svg-optimization --with-gstreamer=1.0 Setting top to : /builddir/build/BUILD/nuvolaplayer-2.4.2 Setting out to : /builddir/build/BUILD/nuvolaplayer-2.4.2/build Revision : 844 Install prefix : /usr Checking for 'gcc' (c compiler) : /usr/lib/ccache/gcc Checking for program pkg-config : /usr/bin/pkg-config Checking for 'gobject-2.0' : yes Checking for 'gthread-2.0' : yes Checking for program valac-0.8 : not found Checking for program valac : /usr/bin/valac Checking for valac version >= (0, 8, 0) : (0, 25, 2) Checking for program gtester : /usr/bin/gtester Checking for program valac-0.14 : /usr/bin/valac Checking for valac-0.14 version >= (0, 14, 2) : (0, 25, 2) Checking for program msgfmt : /usr/bin/msgfmt Checking for program perl : /usr/bin/perl Checking for 'intltool-merge' : /usr/bin/intltool-merge Checking for header locale.h : yes Compiler optimizations: ON Checking for 'gee-1.0' >= 0.6 : yes Checking for 'libnotify' >= 0.7 : yes Checking for 'x11' >= 0.5 : yes Checking for 'gtk+-3.0' >= 3.4: yes Checking for 'gdk-3.0' >= 3.4 : yes Checking for 'gstreamer-1.0' >= 1.0 : yes Checking for 'libsoup-2.4' version: yes Checking for 'libsoup-2.4' >= 2.38: yes Checking for 'json-glib-1.0' >= 0.7 : yes Checking for 'unity' >= 3.0 : not found Checking for 'dbusmenu-glib-0.4' >= 0.4 : yes Checking for 'webkitgtk-3.0' >= 1.8 : yes Checking for 'javascriptcoregtk-3.0' >= 1.8 : yes Checking for 'glib-2.0' >= 2.32 : yes Checking for 'gthread-2.0' >= 2.32: yes Checking for 'gio-2.0' >= 2.32: yes Checking for program rsvg-convert : /usr/bin/rsvg-convert Checking for program scour: not found Configuration status : OK Features: Unity Quicklist : OFF optimization of SVG images: OFF Last.fm scrobbling: ON Notifications : ON experimental features : OFF debug symbols : OFF debug memory usage: OFF 'configure' finished successfully (3.028s) + xvfb-run -a waf build --prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib Waf: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/nuvolaplayer-2.4.2/build' [ 1/143] data/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps/nuvolaplayer.png: graphics/nuvola-icon/nuvola-player.16.svg -> build/data/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps/nuvolaplayer.png [ 2/143] data/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps/nuvolaplayer.png: graphics/nuvola-icon/nuvola-player.22.svg -> build/data/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps/nuvolaplayer.png [ 3/143] data/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps/nuvolaplayer.png: graphics/nuvola-icon/nuvola-player.22.svg -> build/data/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps/nuvolaplayer.png [ 4/143] data/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/nuvolaplayer.png: graphics/nuvola-icon/nuvola-player.22.svg -> build/data/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/nuvolaplayer.png [ 5/143] data/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/nuvolaplayer.png: graphics/nuvola-icon/nuvola-player.orig.svg -> build/data/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/nuvolaplayer.png [ 6/143] data/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps/nuvolaplayer.png: graphics/nuvola-icon/nuvola-player.orig.svg -> build/data/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps/nuvolaplayer.png [ 7/143] data/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/nuvolaplayer.svg: graphics/nuvola-icon/nuvola-player.orig.svg -> build/data/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/nuvolaplayer.svg [ 8/143] data/nuvolaplayer/services/amazon/icon.png: graphics/service-icons/amazon.svg -> build/data/nuvolaplayer/services/amazon/icon.png [ 9/143] data/nuvolaplayer/services/deezer/icon.png: graphics/service-icons/deezer.svg -> build/data/nuvolaplayer/services/deezer/icon.png [ 10/143] data/nuvolaplayer/services/eighttracks/icon.png: graphics/service-icons/eighttracks.svg -> build/data/nuvolaplayer/services/eighttracks/icon.png [ 11/143] data/nuvolaplayer/services/googleplay/icon.png: graphics/service-icons/googleplay.svg -> build/data/nuvolaplayer/services/googleplay/icon.png [ 12/143] data/nuvolaplayer/services/grooveshark/icon.png: graphics/service-icons/grooves
[Bug 890772] Review Request: tvlsim - Travel Market Simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890772 --- Comment #8 from Christopher Meng --- (In reply to Felix Kaechele from comment #5) > I was thinking about the rpmlint warning regarding unused direct library > dependencies. > Those can be fixed by passing "-Wl,--as-needed" to the LDFLAGS from cmake, I > guess. > Maybe this is something you want to consider? I haven't checked if this > breaks anything (as the output actually looks like false positives). In cmake world it's pretty common: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ#Why_are_libraries_linked_to_my_shared_library_included_when_something_links_to_it.3F -- 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 716402] Review Request: ckermit - The quintessential all-purpose communications program
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716402 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- ckermit-9.0.302-7.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ckermit-9.0.302-7.el7 -- 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 449879] Review Request: Zile - Zile Is Lossy Emacs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449879 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- zile-2.4.11-3.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zile-2.4.11-3.el7 -- 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 449879] Review Request: Zile - Zile Is Lossy Emacs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449879 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- ckermit-9.0.302-7.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ckermit-9.0.302-7.el7 -- 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 1123689] Review Request: yadifa - Lightweight authoritative Name Server with DNSSEC capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123689 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- yadifa-1.0.3-2.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing 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 226535] Merge Review: w3m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226535 Parag changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #27 from Parag --- Package Change Request == Package Name: w3m New Branches: epel7 Owners: pnemade InitialCC: i18n-team -- 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 1082656] Review Request: python-diff-cover - Automatically find diff lines that need test coverage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082656 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-diff-cover-0.6.0-1.f ||c20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-08-29 23:57:51 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- python-diff-cover-0.6.0-1.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 1127720] Review Request: perl-MooX-ConfigFromFile - Moo eXtension for initializing objects from config file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127720 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-MooX-ConfigFromFile-0. ||002-1.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-08-29 23:55:04 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- perl-MooX-ConfigFromFile-0.002-1.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 1134108] Review Request: perl-MooX-Options - Explicit Options eXtension for Object Class
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134108 Bug 1134108 depends on bug 1127720, which changed state. Bug 1127720 Summary: Review Request: perl-MooX-ConfigFromFile - Moo eXtension for initializing objects from config file https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127720 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 986608] Review Request: weasyprint - Utility and Python library to render HTML and CSS to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=986608 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- weasyprint-0.22-1.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/weasyprint-0.22-1.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Thanks for the quick review Florian :) New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-pykalman Short Description: Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm Upstream URL: http://pykalman.github.io/ Owners: ankursinha Branches: f21 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 1135528] Review Request: kwrited - KDE Write Daemon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135528 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||i...@cicku.me Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|i...@cicku.me 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 1135654] Review Request: libpuma - Library for parsing and manipulating C/C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135654 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||i...@cicku.me Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|i...@cicku.me 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 1065054] Review Request: virt-sandbox-runner - Qt wrapper for virt-sandbox utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065054 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||i...@cicku.me Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|i...@cicku.me 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 1128754] Review Request: mozilla-requestpolicy - Firefox and Seamonkey extension that gives you control over cross-site requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128754 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||i...@cicku.me Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|i...@cicku.me Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng --- I will give it a try later, as I've never reviewed such packages.. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135654] New: Review Request: libpuma - Library for parsing and manipulating C/C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135654 Bug ID: 1135654 Summary: Review Request: libpuma - Library for parsing and manipulating C/C++ source code Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/libpuma/libpuma.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/libpuma/libpuma-1.2-1.fc22.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: PUMA is a library of C++ classes for parsing and manipulating C/C++ source code. It provides different levels of analyzing source code, i.e. lexical, syntactical, and semantical analyses. Additionally, PUMA contains its own C preprocessor following the macro language understood by the GNU C preprocessor (cpp). The parsers for C and C++ are based on an extensible recursive descent parser architecture that can be easily adapted for your own needs by inheriting from one of the parsers. They are oriented on the ISO/IEC standards defined in ISO/IEC 9899:1999(E) and ISO/IEC 14882:1998(E) but also supporting a list of extensions to the C and C++ languages. The information about the source code being analyzed is organized in an attributed syntax tree referring to a separate structure of semantic information. For the purpose of manipulating source code PUMA provides a syntax based mechanism for searching code structures. Manipulations on the source code can be collected and validated before executing them in a single transaction. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 Mohammed Isam changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Mohammed Isam --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: gnudos Short Description: A GNU library to help new users of the GNU system Upstream URL: http://sites.google.com/site/mohammedisam2000/home/projects/ Owners: mohammedisam 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
[Bug 1129902] Review Request: python-gitapi - Pure-Python API to git, which uses the command-line interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129902
Eduardo Mayorga changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal)
--- Comment #5 from Eduardo Mayorga ---
Query upstream to clarify the license. "License: Do whatever you want, don't
blame me" just leads to confusion. The copyright text in README.rst looks like
a MIT license variant, and the author consider it as a 'more permissive
license'. Moreover, "You may also use this software as licensed under the MIT
or BSD licenses" sounds risky. I'd prefer to consult fedora-legal about this
before approving this package.
I posted this thread:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2014-August/002497.html
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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"Unknown or generated". 8 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/makerpm/reviews/1129902-python-
gitapi/licensecheck.txt
[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/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.4
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.4
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 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: No rpmlint messages.
[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
%{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.
[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
[Bug 1081782] Review Request: astloch-fonts - Astloch fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1081782 Luis Bazan changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Luis Bazan --- The changes were made as they were requested in all comments. Approved! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1123689] Review Request: yadifa - Lightweight authoritative Name Server with DNSSEC capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123689 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- yadifa-1.0.3-2.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yadifa-1.0.3-2.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- yadifa-1.0.3-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yadifa-1.0.3-2.el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1123689] Review Request: yadifa - Lightweight authoritative Name Server with DNSSEC capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123689 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- yadifa-1.0.3-2.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yadifa-1.0.3-2.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 1123689] Review Request: yadifa - Lightweight authoritative Name Server with DNSSEC capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123689 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- yadifa-1.0.3-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yadifa-1.0.3-2.fc21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- yadifa-1.0.3-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yadifa-1.0.3-2.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 1123689] Review Request: yadifa - Lightweight authoritative Name Server with DNSSEC capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123689 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1123689] Review Request: yadifa - Lightweight authoritative Name Server with DNSSEC capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123689 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- yadifa-1.0.3-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yadifa-1.0.3-2.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 505154] Tracker: Review Requests for Science and Technology related packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505154 Milan Bouchet-Valat changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nalimi...@club.fr Depends On||1040517 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040517 [Bug 1040517] Review Request: julia - High-level, high-performance dynamic language for technical computing -- 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 1040517] Review Request: julia - High-level, high-performance dynamic language for technical computing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040517 Milan Bouchet-Valat changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||505154 (FE-SCITECH) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505154 [Bug 505154] Tracker: Review Requests for Science and Technology related packages -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 502621] Review Request: libint - A library that evaluates integrals over Gaussian basis functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502621 Susi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||libint Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Susi Lehtola --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libint New Branches: epel7 Owners: jussilehtola -- 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 903380] Review Request: libint2 - A library for efficient evaluation of electron repulsion integrals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903380 Susi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #30 from Susi Lehtola --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libint2 New Branches: epel7 Owners: jussilehtola -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739398] Review Request: openblas - An optimized BLAS library based on GotoBLAS2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739398 Susi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #49 from Susi Lehtola --- Package Change Request == Package Name: openblas New Branches: epel7 Owners: jussilehtola -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1129902] Review Request: python-gitapi - Pure-Python API to git, which uses the command-line interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129902 Eduardo Mayorga changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |python-gitapi - gitapi is a |python-gitapi - Pure-Python |pure-Python API to git, |API to git, which uses the |which uses the command-line |command-line interface |interface | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670541] Review Request: libxc - Library of exchange and correlation functionals to be used in DFT codes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670541 Susi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Susi Lehtola --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libxc New Branches: epel7 Owners: jussilehtola -- 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 1129902] Review Request: python-gitapi - gitapi is a pure-Python API to git, which uses the command-line interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129902 --- Comment #4 from Julien Enselme --- I included the license file. I have corrected the rpmlint errors. Concerning shebang: I didn't find any (and I think than rpmlint can spot this). Spec URL: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SPECS/python-gitapi.spec SRPM URL: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SRPMS/python-gitapi-1.0.0-4.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 1116653] Review Request: abduco - Session management in a clean and simple way
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1116653 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|abduco-0.1-1.fc19 |abduco-0.1-1.el6 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- abduco-0.1-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117112] Review Request: biblesync - A Cross-platform library for sharing Bible navigation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117112 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|biblesync-1.0.2-4.fc19 |biblesync-1.0.2-4.el6 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System --- biblesync-1.0.2-4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 643332] Review Request: notmuch - System for indexing, searching, and tagging email
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=643332 Luke Macken changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||lmac...@redhat.com Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |--- Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #10 from Luke Macken --- Package Change Request == Package Name: notmuch New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: lmacken ndevos -- 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 890772] Review Request: tvlsim - Travel Market Simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890772 --- Comment #7 from Denis Arnaud --- Yes, for sure, I am still very much interested in having that package finding its way to Fedora/CentOS/RedHat, as it is the main entry point for the whole Travel Market Simulator project (http://www.travel-market-simulator.com). Without that last package, the project is a lot less interesting... Thanks in advance! Kind regards Denis -- 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 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020
Florian "der-flo" Lehner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #11 from Florian "der-flo" Lehner ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated".
[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/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.4
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.4
[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 593920 bytes in 43 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
%{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:
[!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
---> I'm ok with this. It's not a blocker for this package.
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python-
pykalman-doc , python3-pykalman , python3-pykalman-doc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported No
[Bug 1128395] Review Request: flatzebra - A generic game engine for 2D double-buffering animation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128395 --- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande --- Package build fails: libtoolize package is missing. > autoreconf -fiv It's advisable to patching on 'configuration' and 'make' files instead of include an 'autoreconf' task into package building. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835
--- Comment #18 from David Parsons ---
(In reply to Pierre-YvesChibon from comment #16)
> (In reply to David Parsons from comment #10)
> > As for point 3. I had read this:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Libexecdir (files in lib
> > are indeed "executable programs that are designed primarily to be run by
> > other programs rather than by users") but hadn't actually grasped that
> > %{_libdir} would be /usr/lib64 on X86_64.
>
> If the files in %{_libexecdir} are meant to be executed but not by the user,
> then my thoughts are that this folder is appropriate and I don't see the
> need to move them to %{_libdir}.
> If the files are not meant to be executed, then we should look into putting
> them in %{_libdir}
The files are indeed meant to be executed by a program (not directly by the
user). However, they are not in %{_libexecdir} but in %{_prefix}/lib. This
conforms to FHS and debian packaging guidelines but apparently not quite to
fedora's...
Would it be as simple as adding "mv %{_prefix}/lib %{_libexecdir}" somewhere?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020
--- Comment #10 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) ---
(In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #9)
> hi!
>
> Looks good, but hrere are still some issues:
>
> [ ] You didn't increase the release number
This is not compulsory. Please see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Multiple_Changelog_Entries_per_Release
>
> [ ] Source0 doesn't work.
> Please replace
>
> https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{module_name}-
> %{commit}.tar.gz
> with
> https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
I cannot use the second one. It must end with %{module_name}-%{commit}.tar.gz
for rpmbuild to find the source tar. I've updated the source url as per
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github (I missed out a
/%{commit}/ in the URL). It works now.
> [ ] In the first %files-section is %doc COPYING missing
Moved COPYING to main packages from doc subpackages.
Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.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 1134340] Review Request: python-unp - unp is a command line tool that can unpack archives easily
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134340
Eduardo Mayorga changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|e...@mayorgalinux.com
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Eduardo Mayorga ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues
==
- Latest upstream release is now 0.3
- You must include a license file if upstream decides to not distribute it in
the sources. You can pull the license text copy from Github repository, and you
should contact upstream to get this mistake corrected.
See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
- Since this is not a Python addon module, unp would be a better name.
- Upstream source tarball timestamps are not preserved. Please download it
using a client using proper options.
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps
- Fix the shebangs for both Python 2 and Python 3 scripts. This can solve the
problem:
%if 0%{?with_python3}
rm -rf %{py3dir}
cp -a . %{py3dir}
find %{py3dir} -name '*.py' | xargs sed -i '1s|^#!python|#!%{__python3}|'
%endif # with_python3
find -name '*.py' | xargs sed -i '1s|^#!python|#!%{__python2}|'
- Change BR python-devel to python2-devel.
- There's a test suite that you should run in %check.
- The summary can be improved. "unp is"... is superfluous, simple leave it as:
A command line tool that can unpack archives easily
- python-setuptools is not a runtime dependency, so you can drop this Requires.
- We only have click 2.4 in F20, so this will only work in F21+. When I run it
in my F20:
[makerpm@localhost 1134340-python-unp]$ unp
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/bin/unp", line 5, in
from pkg_resources import load_entry_point
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pkg_resources.py", line 2797, in
parse_requirements(__requires__), Environment()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pkg_resources.py", line 576, in
resolve
raise DistributionNotFound(req)
pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: click>=3.0
= 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". 3 files have unknown license. licensecheck output:
Unknown or generated
unp-0.2/%{py3dir}/setup.py
unp-0.2/setup.py
unp-0.2/unp.py
[!]: 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/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/__pycache__, /usr/lib/python3.4
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/__pycache__, /usr/lib/python3.4
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[!]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build depend
[Bug 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835 --- Comment #17 from Ralf Corsepius --- (In reply to Pierre-YvesChibon from comment #14) > I only partly agree with this, I prefer to review the most complete spec > file even if things are later cleaned in git. I've seen way too many rotten and overly complex specs, to support this thought. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020
--- Comment #9 from Florian "der-flo" Lehner ---
hi!
Looks good, but hrere are still some issues:
[ ] You didn't increase the release number
[ ] Source0 doesn't work.
Please replace
https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{module_name}-%{commit}.tar.gz
with
https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz
[ ] In the first %files-section is %doc COPYING missing
Cheers,
Florian
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020 --- Comment #8 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- (In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #7) > What about these words from pykalman itself: > > "This module implements two algorithms for tracking: the Kalman Filter and > Kalman Smoother. In addition, model parameters which are traditionally > specified by hand can also be learned by the implemented EM algorithm > without any labeled training data." Added. > Can you please use the following format: > > Spec URL: https://url.to.the.spec > SRPM URL: https://url.to.the.srpm Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.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 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835
--- Comment #16 from Pierre-YvesChibon ---
(In reply to David Parsons from comment #10)
> As for point 3. I had read this:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Libexecdir (files in lib
> are indeed "executable programs that are designed primarily to be run by
> other programs rather than by users") but hadn't actually grasped that
> %{_libdir} would be /usr/lib64 on X86_64.
If the files in %{_libexecdir} are meant to be executed but not by the user,
then my thoughts are that this folder is appropriate and I don't see the need
to move them to %{_libdir}.
If the files are not meant to be executed, then we should look into putting
them in %{_libdir}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835 --- Comment #15 from Pierre-YvesChibon --- > Finally, you need a sponsor first, *sigh... Hope you can get sponsored soon. Unless I'm mistaking, I already see two sponsors on that 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 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835
--- Comment #14 from Pierre-YvesChibon ---
(In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #11)
> (In reply to David Parsons from comment #10)
> > However, if EPEL5 is still being used, I suppose it would be best to
> > support it and hence keep the "rm -rf %{buildroot}" statement in the
> > %install section.
> IMO, it's much easier, cleaner and less error-prone to remove all legacy rpm
> stuff from Fedora rpms and re-add it if necessary on the corresponding
> branches in git.
I only partly agree with this, I prefer to review the most complete spec file
even if things are later cleaned in git. So if David wants to support EL5,
basically I prefer to review the EL5 spec since it will be Fedora compatible
anyway...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1048493] Review Request: icecat - GNU version of Firefox browser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1048493 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1048493] Review Request: icecat - GNU version of Firefox browser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1048493 --- Comment #49 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1029348] Review Request: objectweb-asm3 - Java bytecode manipulation and analysis framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1029348 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1029348] Review Request: objectweb-asm3 - Java bytecode manipulation and analysis framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1029348 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 506954] Review Request: uberftp - GridFTP-enabled ftp client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506954 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla --- Branch exists. -- 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 506954] Review Request: uberftp - GridFTP-enabled ftp client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506954 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|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 590625] Review Request: maven-doxia-tools - Maven Doxia Integration Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590625 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590625] Review Request: maven-doxia-tools - Maven Doxia Integration Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590625 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020 --- Comment #7 from Florian "der-flo" Lehner --- What about these words from pykalman itself: "This module implements two algorithms for tracking: the Kalman Filter and Kalman Smoother. In addition, model parameters which are traditionally specified by hand can also be learned by the implemented EM algorithm without any labeled training data." Can you please use the following format: Spec URL: https://url.to.the.spec SRPM URL: https://url.to.the.srpm Cheers, Florian -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #25 from Petr Šabata --- Ok, the spec looks better now and I'm going to approve the package. However, I see you also bumped the soname while there was no need for it. This should only be done when you change the ABI so people using your library don't have to unnecessarily rebuild their software. Be sure to read about 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 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020 --- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- (In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #5) > hi! > > Did you miss to upload the updated spec? Apart from the release number > nothing has changed. Yikes! Sorry. Uploaded now: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec > To the description: "The summary should be a short and concise description > of the package. The description expands upon this." > For more see: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description > > To write a descriptive sentence should not be too much to ask. I'm sorry. I really can't think of what to write. It really is *just* a python implementation of a kalman filter. I don't think I should explain what a kalman filter is in the description, for example. Do you have a suggestion? Thanks, Ankur -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1134003] Review Request: php-doctrine-instantiator - Instantiate objects in PHP without invoking their constructors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134003 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- php-doctrine-instantiator-1.0.2-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing 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 1134351] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-TestBase - Module::Install Support for Test::Base
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134351 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- Package perl-Module-Install-TestBase-0.86-2.fc21, perl-Makefile-DOM-0.006-9.fc21: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing perl-Module-Install-TestBase-0.86-2.fc21 perl-Makefile-DOM-0.006-9.fc21' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-9915/perl-Module-Install-TestBase-0.86-2.fc21,perl-Makefile-DOM-0.006-9.fc21 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1133869] Review Request: python-schema - Simple data validation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1133869 Florian "der-flo" Lehner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||d...@der-flo.net Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@der-flo.net Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Florian "der-flo" Lehner --- hi! why didn't you package it for python3? According to https://pypi.python.org/pypi/schema "schema is tested with Python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3 and PyPy" Cheers, Florian -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1129700] Review Request: php-ircmaxell-security-lib - A Base Security Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129700 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- php-ircmaxell-security-lib-1.0.0-2.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing 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 1106415] Review Request: sayonara - A lightweight Qt Audio player
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1106415
--- Comment #3 from MartinKG ---
(In reply to NIWA Hideyuki from comment #2)
> Hi
> This is my informal review. I comment about the spec file etc.
>
> 1. Source0:sayonara-player-%{svnrev}.tar.gz
>
> URL is necessary for the Source0 tag.
There is no URL available for the recent snv tarball.
>
> 2. #
> https://sayonara-player.googlecode.com/issues/
> attachment?aid=92000&name=sayonara-desktop.
> patch&token=ABZ6GAezT8Y7uTPdlcAPejNluH3R5pcUiQ%3A1402298727539
> Patch0: sayonara-desktop.patch
> #
> https://sayonara-player.googlecode.com/issues/
> attachment?aid=92001&name=sayonara-libdir.
> patch&token=ABZ6GAftNAWKGIQtU8vT9AwhapN1BEXTdw%3A1402298727539
> Patch1: sayonara-libdir.patch
>
> When the brief comment is put on the upper part of Patch0 and Patch1
> above upstream bug tracker link, it is helpful.
>
done
> 3. BuildRequires: cmake
> BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils
> BuildRequires: qt-devel
> BuildRequires: alsa-lib-devel
> BuildRequires: gstreamer-devel
> BuildRequires: gstreamer-plugins-base-devel
> BuildRequires: libnotify-devel
> Buildrequires: curl-devel
> BuildRequires: libxml2-devel
> BuildRequires: taglib-devel
> BuildRequires: glib2-devel
> Requires: svn
>
> Please add comments on explicit dependencies.
>
remove unnecessary dependencies
> 4. rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/menu
>
> Is this processing necessary? Please delete it if it is unnecessary.
its necessary
Spec URL: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2cnhsow8i72mput/sayonara.spec?dl=0
SRPM URL:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/f8vgj2c7whhv4ze/sayonara-0.4.1-1.3.svn870.fc20.src.rpm?dl=0
%changelog
* Fri Aug 29 2014 Martin Gansser -
0.4.1-1.3.svn870
- rebuild for new svn release
- added more comments
rpmlint sayonara-debuginfo-0.4.1-1.3.svn870.fc20.x86_64.rpm
sayonara-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 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 1134020] Review Request: python-pykalman - Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134020 --- Comment #5 from Florian "der-flo" Lehner --- hi! Did you miss to upload the updated spec? Apart from the release number nothing has changed. To the description: "The summary should be a short and concise description of the package. The description expands upon this." For more see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description To write a descriptive sentence should not be too much to ask. Regards, Florian -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135528] New: Review Request: kwrited - KDE Write Daemon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135528 Bug ID: 1135528 Summary: Review Request: kwrited - KDE Write Daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kwrited.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kwrited-5.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: KDE Write Daemon Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1135522] New: Review Request: kwin - KDE window manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135522 Bug ID: 1135522 Summary: Review Request: kwin - KDE window manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kwin.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kwin-5.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: KDE window manager Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835
--- Comment #13 from David Parsons ---
OK I will remove "rm -rf %{buildroot}" from %install and add it back into the
EPEL5 package when needed.
As for the %{_prefix}/lib vs %{_libdir} (or %{_libexecdir}), I'm a former
member of the development team of kissplice so I could try and adapt the build
process.
These files would however need to remain in %{_prefix}/lib in debian style
distributions and I'm not sure how to achieve this in a clean way with CMake...
Also, I'm pretty sure there is a simple way to tell rpm to put in
%{_libexecdir} what it will find in %{_prefix}/lib, is there not ?
Thanks,
David
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135519] New: Review Request: kio-extras - Additional components to increase the functionality of KIO Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135519 Bug ID: 1135519 Summary: Review Request: kio-extras - Additional components to increase the functionality of KIO Framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kio-extras.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kio-extras-5.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Additional components to increase the functionality of KIO Framework Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1124483] Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124483 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- ampr-ripd-1.11-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ampr-ripd-1.11-1.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 1124483] Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124483 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- ampr-ripd-1.11-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ampr-ripd-1.11-1.fc21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135511] New: Review Request: kmenuedit - KDE menu editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135511 Bug ID: 1135511 Summary: Review Request: kmenuedit - KDE menu editor Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kmenuedit.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kmenuedit-5.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: KDE menu editor. Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1135509] New: Review Request: kinfocenter - KDE Info Center
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135509 Bug ID: 1135509 Summary: Review Request: kinfocenter - KDE Info Center Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kinfocenter.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kinfocenter-5.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: KDE Info Center. Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1124483] Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124483 Jaroslav Škarvada changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-08-29 09:37:59 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- amprd-1.4-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/amprd-1.4-2.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 1124482] Review Request: amprd - An user-space IPIP encapsulation daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124482 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- amprd-1.4-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/amprd-1.4-2.fc21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 506954] Review Request: uberftp - GridFTP-enabled ftp client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506954 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #17 from Steve Traylen --- Package Change Request == Package Name: uberftp New Branches: epel7 Owners: stevetraylen -- 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 1134351] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-TestBase - Module::Install Support for Test::Base
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134351 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Module-Install-TestBase-0.86-2.fc21,perl-Makefile-DOM-0.006-9.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Module-Install-TestBase-0.86-2.fc21,perl-Makefile-DOM-0.006-9.fc21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135503] New: Review Request: khelpcenter - Application to show KDE Application's documentation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135503 Bug ID: 1135503 Summary: Review Request: khelpcenter - Application to show KDE Application's documentation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/khelpcenter.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/khelpcenter-5.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: Application to show KDE Application's documentation. Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1135502] New: Review Request: rubygem-rack-cors - Middleware for enabling Cross-Origin Resource Sharing in Rack apps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135502 Bug ID: 1135502 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rack-cors - Middleware for enabling Cross-Origin Resource Sharing in Rack apps Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: val...@civ.zcu.cz QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/rubygem-rack-cors-0.2.9-1/rubygem-rack-cors.spec SRPM URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/rubygem-rack-cors-0.2.9-1/rubygem-rack-cors-0.2.9-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: Middleware that will make Rack-based apps CORS compatible. Read more here: http://blog.sourcebender.com/2010/06/09/introducin-rack-cors.html. Fork the project here: http://github.com/cyu/rack-cors. Fedora Account System Username: valtri -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117223] Review Request: kronometer - A simple KDE stopwatch application
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117223 Fl@sh changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kaperan...@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 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 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-08-29 09:20:42 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 --- Comment #7 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- (In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #6) > Git done (by process-git-requests). Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1128395] Review Request: flatzebra - A generic game engine for 2D double-buffering animation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128395 Antonio Trande 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 590625] Review Request: maven-doxia-tools - Maven Doxia Integration Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590625 Darryl L. Pierce changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dpie...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Darryl L. Pierce --- Package Change Request == Package Name: maven-doxia New Branches: epel7 Owners: mcpierce -- 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 1135499] New: Review Request: kf5-libnm-qt - A Tier 1 KDE Frameworks 5 module that wraps NetworkManager DBus API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135499 Bug ID: 1135499 Summary: Review Request: kf5-libnm-qt - A Tier 1 KDE Frameworks 5 module that wraps NetworkManager DBus API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kf5-libnm-qt.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kf5-libnm-qt-5.0.92-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: A Tier 1 KDE Frameworks 5 Qt library for NetworkManager. Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1029348] Review Request: objectweb-asm3 - Java bytecode manipulation and analysis framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1029348 Darryl L. Pierce changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dpie...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Darryl L. Pierce --- Package Change Request == Package Name: objectweb-asm3 New Branches: epel7 Owners: mcpierce InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124483] Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124483 --- Comment #6 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- (In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #5) > Git done (by process-git-requests). Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135495] New: Review Request: kf5-libmm-qt - A Tier 1 KDE Frameworks module wrapping ModemManager DBus API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135495 Bug ID: 1135495 Summary: Review Request: kf5-libmm-qt - A Tier 1 KDE Frameworks module wrapping ModemManager DBus API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dvra...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1135103 (plasma5) Spec URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kf5-libmm-qt.spec SRPM URL: https://dvratil.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/review/kf5-libmm-qt-5.0.92-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: A Qt 5 library for ModemManager Fedora Account System Username: dvratil Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135103 [Bug 1135103] Plasma 5 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 1134835] Review Request: kissplice - Detection of various kinds of polymorphism in RNA-seq data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134835 --- Comment #12 from Christopher Meng --- Hi David, Ralf's comments are right, IMO less legacy RPM stuffs in SPEC will make it cleaner. Also one more important, if you don't use EPEL, don't maintain packages on that branch. I can help you by proposing a patch later, you should contact upstream first to get their feedback. Finally, you need a sponsor first, *sigh... Hope you can get sponsored soon. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791263] Review Request: mockito - A Java mocking framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791263 --- Comment #31 from Darryl L. Pierce --- (In reply to Marcin Zajaczkowski from comment #30) > The version is already "feature complete", but there are some continuous > delivery related things in progress. I think the first part of September is > pretty possible. > > 1.10.0 is the next version in the 1.x line and is planned to be backward > compatible, so if this is not a problem for you to later upgrade 1.9.5 to > 1.10.0 in EPEL7 that would be IMHO the best option. I'm fine with the option that gets mockito into EPEL sooner. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124483] Review Request: ampr-ripd - Routing daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124483 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124482] Review Request: amprd - An user-space IPIP encapsulation daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124482 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1124482] Review Request: amprd - An user-space IPIP encapsulation daemon for the ampr network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124482 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
