[Bug 1047788] Review Request: python-naftawayh - Arabic word tagger
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047788
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||panem...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com
--- Comment #5 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com ---
Review:
+ package built fine in mock rawhide(x86_64)
+ rpmlint on generated rpms gave output
python-naftawayh.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found ar
python-naftawayh.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stopwords -
stop words, stop-words, Stoppard
python-naftawayh.noarch: W: no-documentation
python-naftawayh.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stopwords - stop
words, stop-words, Stoppard
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
+ Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum)
srpm tarball: 862c8e2ddcd09bfd55f9218e31998a759afc507b4f26549a835809a8eb3893bb
upstream tarball :
862c8e2ddcd09bfd55f9218e31998a759afc507b4f26549a835809a8eb3893bb
+ License is just GPL+ as per PKG-INFO
suggestions:
1) Email to upstream author and get clarification on what is the license for
this python module. When you get reply you can include that reply as a LICENSE
file as Source1: in spec and add it to %doc
2) I failed to understand the meaning of following line
#Site of files just for including:
instead of this you can include like Remove the python shebang
3) you need to follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python
guidelines
Add in %prep after setup macro line
rm -rf *.egg-info
this is to make sure you will not install directly egg info file that upstream
if providing and instead you are installing egg info that gets created in
%build section
4) As per python guidelines your %install section should use
%{__python2} setup.py install --skip-build --root=%{buildroot}
5) your %files section should look like this
%files -n python-%{module_name}
%doc PKG-INFO
%{python2_sitelib}/%{modname}/
%{python2_sitelib}/%{distname}-%{version}-py2.*.egg-info
6) License tag can be just GPL+ as there is no mention of any GPL version
information but good to ask upstream.
7) Group tag is optional so you can remove it for fedora releases.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1051840] Review Request: python-libqutrub - Arabic verb conjuagtion library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051840
--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com ---
Review:
+ package built fine in mock rawhide(x86_64)
+ rpmlint on generated rpms gave output
python-libqutrub.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) conjuagtion -
conjugation, conjuration, continuation
python-libqutrub.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found ar
python-libqutrub.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conjuagtion -
conjugation, conjuration, continuation
python-libqutrub.noarch: W: no-documentation
python-libqutrub.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) conjuagtion -
conjugation, conjuration, continuation
python-libqutrub.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conjuagtion -
conjugation, conjuration, continuation
python-libqutrub.src: W: strange-permission LibQutrub-1.0.zip 0600L
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
+ Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum)
srpm tarball: c10d6e1d101026920060d2b8d921debcdfaaf795bd3c7241278e357415e942c1
upstream tarball :
c10d6e1d101026920060d2b8d921debcdfaaf795bd3c7241278e357415e942c1
+ License is just GPL+ as per PKG-INFO
suggestions:
1) Email to upstream author and get clarification on what is the license for
this python module. When you get reply you can include that reply as a LICENSE
file as Source1: in spec and add it to %doc
2) I failed to understand the meaning of following line
#Site of files just for including:
instead of this you can include like Remove the python shebang
3) you need to follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python
guidelines
Add in %prep after setup macro line
rm -rf *.egg-info
this is to make sure you will not install directly egg info file that upstream
if providing and instead you are installing egg info that gets created in
%build section
4) As per python guidelines your %install section should use
%{__python2} setup.py install --skip-build --root=%{buildroot}
5) your %files section should look like this
%files -n python-%{module_name}
%doc PKG-INFO
%{python2_sitelib}/%{modname}/
%{python2_sitelib}/%{distname}-%{version}-py2.*.egg-info
6) License tag can be just GPL+ as there is no mention of any GPL version
information but good to ask upstream.
Note: We need some reference that will show what is the license for this
package.
7) Group tag is optional so you can remove it for fedora releases.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1126046] Review Request: perl-MouseX-NativeTraits - Extend your attribute interfaces for Mouse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1126046 --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- Please use a schema in the URLs next time. Please make sure the standalone SPEC file matches the one built into the SRPM next time. I will use SPEC file from the SRPM for this review, as it is newer. URL and Source0 are usable. Ok. Source archive is original (SHA-256: f8a5bf5a28702dfb13c8093be5c41cab9c5fc1c5d247ab91e22e7dd72764cb5e). Ok. License verified from lib/MouseX/NativeTraits.pm and META.yml. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. Summary and description are Ok. FIX: Remove explicit BuildRoot definition as well as cleaning it in %install and %clean section. This are done automatically in Fedora. TODO: Replace %__perl macros with plain `perl' command. TODO: Replace PERL_INSTALL_ROOT argument with DESTDIR argument in the %install sections to make the commands more similar to other (automake) packages. TODO: Remove cleaning the empty directories from %install section. Current ExtUtils::MakerMaker does not create empty directories anymore. FIX: Remove explicit defattr definition in %files sections. This is not necessary in current Fedora anymore. FIX: Remove bundled modules from ./inc and build-require on `perl(inc::Module::Install) = 1.06' instead of `perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)' or declare all dependencies of those modules as BuildRequires. TODO: Build-require `perl(strict)' (Makefile.PL:1). TODO: Build-require `perl(warnings)' (Makefile.PL:2). FIX: Build-require `perl(List::Util)' (lib/MouseX/NativeTraits/MethodProvider/ArrayRef.pm:5). FIX: Build-require `perl(Mouse::Role)' (lib/MouseX/NativeTraits.pm:3). Data::Dumper is not probably used (t/070_native_traits/050_trait_hash.t:235). Ok. Mouse::Util::TypeConstraints not used (t/070_native_traits/013_array_coerce.t:13). Ok. TODO: Build-require `perl(overload)' (t/070_native_traits/010_trait_array.t:99). Test::Mouse not used (t/070_native_traits/103_custom_instance.t:7). Ok. TODO: Build-require `perl(Tie::Hash)' t/05_remain_tied.t:7. FIX: No tests are executed. Add %check section with `make test' command. $ rpmlint perl-MouseX-NativeTraits.spec ../SRPMS/perl-MouseX-NativeTraits-1.09-1.fc22.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-MouseX-NativeTraits-1.09-1.fc22.noarch.rpm perl-MouseX-NativeTraits.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessors - accessory, accessorizes, accessorize perl-MouseX-NativeTraits.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US clearers - clearer, cleaners, cleavers perl-MouseX-NativeTraits.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessors - accessory, accessorizes, accessorize perl-MouseX-NativeTraits.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US clearers - clearer, cleaners, cleavers 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. rpmlint is Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-MouseX-NativeTraits-1.09-1.fc22.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/doc/perl-MouseX-NativeTraits -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1227 Nov 26 2012 /usr/share/doc/perl-MouseX-NativeTraits/Changes -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 550 Nov 26 2012 /usr/share/doc/perl-MouseX-NativeTraits/README -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1938 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Custom::Trait::Array.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1935 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Custom::Trait::Bool.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1936 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Custom::Trait::Code.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1933 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Custom::Trait::Counter.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1938 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Custom::Trait::Hash.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1934 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Custom::Trait::Number.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1935 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Custom::Trait::String.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1986 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/Mouse::Meta::Attribute::Native.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 3553 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/MouseX::NativeTraits.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 4263 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/MouseX::NativeTraits::ArrayRef.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2426 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/MouseX::NativeTraits::Bool.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2171 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/MouseX::NativeTraits::CodeRef.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2568 Oct 21 08:50 /usr/share/man/man3/MouseX::NativeTraits::Counter.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2839 Oct 21 08:50
[Bug 1133479] Review Request: vdsm-arch-dependencies - architecture specific dependencies for VDSM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1133479 Yaniv Bronhaim ybron...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(dan...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #8 from Yaniv Bronhaim ybron...@redhat.com --- This package helps vdsm to avoid adding requirement for packages which related to specific arch (in that case - dmidecode). when vdsm contains such requirement in the spec, we must sign vdsm package as arch specific. while requiring this meta package, vdsm and all its subpackages can be signed as noarch, except the vdsm-arch-dependencies. we can't do it in one of the already available vdsm-* packages, because we want them also be signed as noarch Hope I clear enough.. What's wrong with using libname? The idea behind is clear and already discussed (hope Dan can provide link about it). main goal - to avoid having arch dependency in vdsm-* 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 1133479] Review Request: vdsm-arch-dependencies - architecture specific dependencies for VDSM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1133479
--- Comment #9 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
we can't do it in one of the already available vdsm-* packages,
because we want them also be signed as noarch
The BuildArch tag can be set per subpackage. Package vdsm, for example,
currently builds arch-specific packages as well as noarch packages. Creating
a separate empty src.rpm for that only creates overhead.
What's wrong with using libname?
Why define %{libname} and not use it anywhere?
And if %libname were to be used in the spec file, why not simply use %name
instead?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1131127] Review Request: safelease - legacy locking mechanism for VDSM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1131127 --- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- There are various packaging mistakes (do pay attention to what the fedora-review and rpmlint tools find, for example), one which I had pointed out to Yoav in private already: The package is inacceptable so far. In particular, because it doesn't build from source code but includes only a precompiled executable $ tar xfz safelease-1.0.tar.gz $ file safelease-1.0/safelease safelease-1.0/safelease: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=78aaab633c37efff02253f07db38b0f622a6999e, not stripped Also, it is very unusual for the reviewer (and potential sponsor) to provide updates of the package, since self-approval of own packages is not possible. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1121075] Review Request: rubygem-websocket-driver - WebSocket protocol handler with pluggable I/O
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121075 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(jstribny@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #6 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- For me the package builds in mock just fine... Fresh Koji build: koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7923663 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154650] Review Request: python-oslotest - OpenStack test framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154650 Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-oslotest Short Description: OpenStack test framework Upstream URL: http://launchpad.net/oslo Owners: apevec 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 1036354] Review Request: nodejs-codemirror - A versatile JS text editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036354
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||panem...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com ---
Review:
+ package built fine in mock rawhide(x86_64)
- rpmlint on generated rpms gave output
nodejs-codemirror.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.20.0-1
['4.6.0-1.fc22', '4.6.0-1']
nodejs-codemirror.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
nodejs-codemirror.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/node_modules/codemirror/mode/dylan/index.html
nodejs-codemirror.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/node_modules/codemirror/addon/hint/html-hint.js
nodejs-codemirror.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/node_modules/codemirror/bin/authors.sh
nodejs-codemirror.src: W: strange-permission codemirror-4.6.0.tgz 0640L
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 3 warnings.
+ Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum)
upstream
tarball:c7d089b5ebec55fb9edbb05090f2ffc66b950018607fdc2c2d01678c483def87
srpm tarball:c7d089b5ebec55fb9edbb05090f2ffc66b950018607fdc2c2d01678c483def87
+ License is MIT and its text is included in LICENSE
Suggestions:
1) Fix the rpmlint message of changelog version and then manually change the
tarball permission from 0640 to 664 and then create srpm. Also, shebang issues.
See
2) Group tag is optional and you may want to remove it for Fedora releases
3) change
BuildRequires: nodejs-devel
to
BuildRequires: nodejs-packaging
4)I don't think you need following in spec so remove it
%{?nodejs_find_provides_and_requires}
5) Its general practice to use in %prep
rm -rf node_modules
Please submit updated srpm for further package review. Also do read
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077795] Review Request: copr-selinux - SELinux module for COPR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077795 --- Comment #12 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com --- Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077795] Review Request: copr-selinux - SELinux module for COPR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077795 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: copr-selinux Short Description: SELinux module for COPR Owners: msuchy Branches: f20 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 1150393] Review Request: tengine - A high performance web server and reverse proxy server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150393 --- Comment #8 from Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Marcela Mašláňová from comment #6) Other sources like 404.html 50x.html contains Powered by nginx. Shouldn't it be powered by Tengine? Yes, I overlooked that, I'll fix that in next SRPM. tengine.init contains nginx.conf and calling of nginx, which is probably fine, because Fedora will be using tengine.service. Personally, I dislike calling binary nginx. There is set a strict conflict with nginx, so it should be functionally fine. I must admit calling the binary differently would be better, but it's upstream decision to stay binary compatible even when it comes to binary name (so you can replace nginx with tengine without even rewriting the initscript and so on). (In reply to Marcela Mašláňová from comment #6) Only man page is called nginx, which doesn't seem right. At least you should create link from tengine man page to this nginx. I will create man-page for dso_tool and tengine link to nginx. You are missing check section in specfile. Did you think about running tests during build time? At least some? They could be conditionalized for running on local if it's not possible to run them at koji. The problem with make test is that currently it needs tengine to be installed to test it. That's not possible to do during RPM creation. I will try to find out how to persuade that test-framework to test tengine without installing it, but if I won't success, I will have to follow the way used by nginx package maintainer - do not run make test during compilation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1140195] Review Request: Paper Shaper - Provides random wallpaper from webcams or saved images or both
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1140195
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
Who is pkcarlisle-dot-com behind?
Write it more as a real name in all places, in the bugzilla account
preferences, in the spec file %changelog: P.K. Carlisle would be one expected
way to write it. Don't use pkcarlisle-dot-com even if it resembles your full
name.
I really can't figure out what this package is. It violates FHS as well:
It doesn't even build. That's no surprise, because no source code archive is
included. The spec file accesses paths/files not included in the src.rpm.
As a minimum, people who submit packages for review should examine a few Fedora
packages (via src.rpms or git) and follow well-known documentation:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Package_Maintainers
Notice the index at the bottom.
Buildroot: %{_sourcedir}
I would estimate that none of the many thousand Fedora (and Red Hat) packages
does it like that, especially since the purpose of the Buildroot is a
different one and clearly _not_ the same as %_sourcedir. Nowadays, one doesn't
set this tag anymore, btw:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155048] Review Request: cvsclient - CVS library for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155048 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155048] New: Review Request: cvsclient - CVS library for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155048 Bug ID: 1155048 Summary: Review Request: cvsclient - CVS library for Java Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/cvsclient.spec SRPM URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/cvsclient-71-1.jenkins11.fc22.src.rpm Description: This package contains Netbeans CVSClient library patched for serialization and synchronization. Fedora Account System Username: msrb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1146917] Review Request: parsero - A Python based Robots.txt audit tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1146917 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||parsero-0.81-1.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-10-21 06:25:37 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- parsero-0.81-1.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 1149558] Review Request: purescript - PureScript Programming Language Compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149558 Bug 1149558 depends on bug 1149550, which changed state. Bug 1149550 Summary: Review Request: ghc-cmdtheline - Declarative command-line option parsing and documentation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149550 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 1148936] Review Request: python-paho-mqtt - A Python MQTT version 3.1/3.1.1 client class
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1148936 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-paho-mqtt-1.0-1.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-10-21 06:25:55 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-paho-mqtt-1.0-1.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 1149550] Review Request: ghc-cmdtheline - Declarative command-line option parsing and documentation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149550 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-cmdtheline-0.2.3-1.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-10-21 06:26:01 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-cmdtheline-0.2.3-1.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 1149554] Review Request: ghc-monad-unify - Generic first-order unification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149554 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-monad-unify-0.2.2-1.fc2 ||0 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-10-21 06:26:24 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-monad-unify-0.2.2-1.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 1149558] Review Request: purescript - PureScript Programming Language Compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149558 Bug 1149558 depends on bug 1149554, which changed state. Bug 1149554 Summary: Review Request: ghc-monad-unify - Generic first-order unification https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149554 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 1149550] Review Request: ghc-cmdtheline - Declarative command-line option parsing and documentation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149550 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-cmdtheline-0.2.3-1.fc20 |ghc-cmdtheline-0.2.3-1.fc19 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-cmdtheline-0.2.3-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 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 1155051] New: Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155051 Bug ID: 1155051 Summary: Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-ldap-plugin.spec SRPM URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-ldap-plugin-1.11-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: This package contains Jenkins plugin which provides security realm based on LDAP authentication. Fedora Account System Username: msrb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155051] Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155051 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1148935] Review Request: python-ipgetter - A Python module to fetch the external IP address
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1148935 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-ipgetter-0.5.2-1.fc2 |python-ipgetter-0.5.2-1.fc2 |1 |0 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-ipgetter-0.5.2-1.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 1149554] Review Request: ghc-monad-unify - Generic first-order unification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149554 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-monad-unify-0.2.2-1.fc2 |ghc-monad-unify-0.2.2-1.fc1 |0 |9 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-monad-unify-0.2.2-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 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 1149558] Review Request: purescript - PureScript Programming Language Compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149558 Bug 1149558 depends on bug 1149556, which changed state. Bug 1149556 Summary: Review Request: ghc-pattern-arrows - Arrows for Pretty Printing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149556 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 1149556] Review Request: ghc-pattern-arrows - Arrows for Pretty Printing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149556 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-pattern-arrows-0.0.2-1. |ghc-pattern-arrows-0.0.2-1. |fc20|fc19 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-pattern-arrows-0.0.2-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 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 1149556] Review Request: ghc-pattern-arrows - Arrows for Pretty Printing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149556 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-pattern-arrows-0.0.2-1. ||fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-10-21 06:28:36 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-pattern-arrows-0.0.2-1.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 1070946] Review Request: python-SimpleCV - Open source framework for building computer vision applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1070946 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-SimpleCV-1.3-3.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 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 1134742] Review Request: python-requests-mock - A requests mocking tool for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134742 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-requests-mock-0.5.1- ||2.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-10-21 06:29:06 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-requests-mock-0.5.1-2.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 1155053] Review Request: jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin - Jenkins Matrix Authorization Strategy Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155053 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155053] New: Review Request: jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin - Jenkins Matrix Authorization Strategy Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155053 Bug ID: 1155053 Summary: Review Request: jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin - Jenkins Matrix Authorization Strategy Plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin.spec SRPM URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin-1.2-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: This Jenkins plugin offers matrix-based security authorization strategies (global and per-project). Fedora Account System Username: msrb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155058] New: Review Request: jenkins-translation-plugin - Jenkins Translation Assistance Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155058 Bug ID: 1155058 Summary: Review Request: jenkins-translation-plugin - Jenkins Translation Assistance Plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-translation-plugin.spec SRPM URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-translation-plugin-1.11-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: This plugin adds an additional dialog box in every page, which enables people to contribute localizations for the messages they are seeing in the current page. This reduces the barrier of entry to localization, and by showing messages in the context of a page, it should also improve the quality of the translation. Fedora Account System Username: msrb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155055] Review Request: jenkins-pam-auth-plugin - Jenkins PAM Authentication plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155055 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155055] New: Review Request: jenkins-pam-auth-plugin - Jenkins PAM Authentication plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155055 Bug ID: 1155055 Summary: Review Request: jenkins-pam-auth-plugin - Jenkins PAM Authentication plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-pam-auth-plugin.spec SRPM URL: https://msrb.fedorapeople.org/review/plugs/jenkins-pam-auth-plugin-1.2-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: This package adds Unix Pluggable Authentication Module (PAM) support to Jenkins. Fedora Account System Username: msrb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155058] Review Request: jenkins-translation-plugin - Jenkins Translation Assistance Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155058 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155051] Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155051 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it 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 1155053] Review Request: jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin - Jenkins Matrix Authorization Strategy Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155053 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it 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 1155058] Review Request: jenkins-translation-plugin - Jenkins Translation Assistance Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155058 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it 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 1155051] Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155051 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags|fedora-review? |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 1144111] Review Request: copr-keygen - Copr aux service that generate keys for sign.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1144111 Valentin Gologuzov vgolo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Valentin Gologuzov vgolo...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: copr-keygen Short Description: Part of Copr build system. Aux service that generate keys for signd Upstream URL: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/copr.git/ Owners: msuchy vgologuz Branches: f19 f20 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 1155099] dbacl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155099 Tobias Florek m...@ibotty.net changed: What|Removed |Added External Bug ID||Red Hat Bugzilla 524277 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155099] New: dbacl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155099 Bug ID: 1155099 Summary: dbacl Product: Fedora Version: 21 Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@ibotty.net QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec: https://math.hu-berlin.de/~florek/dbacl-1.14-1.spec Srpm: https://math.hu-berlin.de/~florek/dbacl-1.14-1.fc21.src.rpm I have no sponsor, etc. This is my first package (an older attempt was taken by someone else when I ran out of time). Rpmlint complains about * incorrect fsf address, * japanese file with non-utf8 encoding. That's something to be fixed upstream I suppose. I have contacted dbacl's author Laird Breyer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1015867] Review Request: conky-manager - Simple tool for managing conky scripts.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1015867
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com
--- Comment #12 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com ---
Review:
+ package built fine in mock rawhide(x86_64)
- rpmlint on generated rpms gave output
conky-manager.src: W: strange-permission
conky-manager_2.2~118~ubuntu14.04.1.tar.gz 0640L
conky-manager.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/conky-manager/images/view-preview.svg
conky-manager.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/conky-manager/images/help-info.svvg
conky-manager.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/conky-manager/images/donate.svg
conky-manager.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/conky-manager/images/view-list.svg
conky-manager.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary conky-manager
conky-manager-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 2 warnings.
+ Source verified with upstream as (sha256sum)
upstream tarball:
8ee789d56a42d178a7c69b24c7e099c27592d088fef4a07ccdf8439598a9dba5
srpm tarball: 8ee789d56a42d178a7c69b24c7e099c27592d088fef4a07ccdf8439598a9dba5
+ License is GPLv3+ and its text is included in vala source headers as GPLv2+
and in COPYING as GPLv3+
Suggestions:
1) Group tag is optional for Fedora and can be removed
2) Patch0 should be written below source0 line
3) patch name should always be start like
%{name}-%{version}-desktopentry-fixer-and-arabizer.patch
4) in %prep, good to add patch level also
%patch0 -p0
5) To preserve the timestamp of upstream files getting installed directly use
make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} INTALL=install -p
6) following lines should be at the end of %install section not in the middle
desktop-file-install
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/conky-manager.desktop
%find_lang %{name}
7) desktop-file-install when used should use --dir option see the usage as
given in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
8) in %files section instead of following 2 lines
%{_datadir}/conky-manager/images/
%{_datadir}/conky-manager/themepacks/
just write
%{_datadir}/conky-manager
This will make sure this package will also own directory
/usr/share/conky-manager
9) The MimeType in desktop file is kept empty. Check with upstream to remove it
or you can remove it using
sed -i '3d' conky-manager.desktop
Reason I am asking this is if there is MimeType then we need to add
update-desktop-database scriptlet
10) fix any other rpmlint message
submit new srpm for further 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 1155051] Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155051
--- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
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:
MIT/X11 (BSD like). Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/gil/1155051-jenkins-ldap-plugin/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/share/maven-metadata, /usr/share/jenkins,
/usr/share/jenkins/plugins
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/maven-metadata,
/usr/share/jenkins, /usr/share/jenkins/plugins
[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 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: 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
Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
= 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in jenkins-
ldap-plugin-javadoc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[Bug 1012169] Review Request: python-llvmmath - LLVM math library in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1012169 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed||2014-10-21 07:47:23 --- Comment #11 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Given that I have retired python-llvpy, this package is not interesting for me anymore. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug. -- 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 1012169] Review Request: python-llvmmath - LLVM math library in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1012169 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |NOTABUG -- 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 1135654] Review Request: libpuma - Library for parsing and manipulating C/C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135654 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077795] Review Request: copr-selinux - SELinux module for COPR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077795 --- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077795] Review Request: copr-selinux - SELinux module for COPR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077795 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1135654] Review Request: libpuma - Library for parsing and manipulating C/C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135654 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1144111] Review Request: copr-keygen - Copr aux service that generate keys for sign.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1144111 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1144111] Review Request: copr-keygen - Copr aux service that generate keys for sign.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1144111 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). Added f21. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154650] Review Request: python-oslotest - OpenStack test framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154650 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154650] Review Request: python-oslotest - OpenStack test framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154650 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155053] Review Request: jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin - Jenkins Matrix Authorization Strategy Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155053
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
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:
MIT/X11 (BSD like). Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/gil/1155053-jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin/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/share/maven-metadata,
/usr/share/jenkins/plugins, /usr/share/jenkins
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/maven-metadata,
/usr/share/jenkins, /usr/share/jenkins/plugins
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[?]: 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.
[x]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
= 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in jenkins-
matrix-auth-plugin-javadoc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps
[Bug 1145443] Review Request: python-pdfkit - Python 2 wrapper for wkhtmltopdf utility to convert HTML to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145443 William Moreno williamjmore...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from William Moreno williamjmore...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-pdfkit Short Description: Python 2 wrapper for wkhtmltopdf utility to convert HTML to PDF Upstream URL: https://github.com/JazzCore/python-pdfkit Owners: williamjmorenor Branches: f19 f20 f21 el6 epel7 InitialCC: williamjmorenor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1150393] Review Request: tengine - A high performance web server and reverse proxy server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150393 --- Comment #9 from Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://jkaluza.fedorapeople.org/tengine-2.0.3-2.fc22.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://jkaluza.fedorapeople.org/tengine.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855331] Review Request: tesla-polyglot - Modules to enable Maven usage in others JVM languages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855331 Michael Simacek msima...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msima...@redhat.com Assignee|m...@redhat.com |msima...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #13 from Michael Simacek msima...@redhat.com --- If you're still interested in packaging it, I'll take the review. Some issues: It seems that it doesn't build with current rawhide version of snakeyaml. Change summary to: Modules to enable Maven usage in other JVM languages (there was gramatical error) Is the depmap still needed? Looks good otherwise, but I didn't run fedora-review on it yet. -- 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 855331] Review Request: tesla-polyglot - Modules to enable Maven usage in others JVM languages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855331 --- Comment #14 from Michael Simacek msima...@redhat.com --- Created attachment 948965 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=948965action=edit build.log build.log for the failing build -- 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 1151462] Review Request: belen - GUI of youtube-dl command
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1151462 --- Comment #14 from Carlos Morel-Riquelme morel.rique...@gmail.com --- 0.1-5 version new spec = https://n0oir.fedorapeople.org/belen.spec new srpm = https://n0oir.fedorapeople.org/belen-0.1-5.fc21.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855331] Review Request: tesla-polyglot - Modules to enable Maven usage in others JVM languages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855331 --- Comment #15 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- (In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #13) If you're still interested in packaging it, I'll take the review. Some issues: It seems that it doesn't build with current rawhide version of snakeyaml. Disabled, i package T-P for gradle, and need only common groovy modules. Change summary to: Modules to enable Maven usage in other JVM languages (there was gramatical error) Fix Is the depmap still needed? Yes, for this reason: - Force clojure-compat usage. Require clojure 1.2.x - clojure-maven-plugin don't work with clojure = 1.5.1 Looks good otherwise, but I didn't run fedora-review on it yet. Thanks! Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/tesla-polyglot.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/tesla-polyglot-0.1.0-1.fc19.src.rpm Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7925643 -- 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 855331] Review Request: tesla-polyglot - Modules to enable Maven usage in other JVM languages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855331 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |tesla-polyglot - Modules to |tesla-polyglot - Modules to |enable Maven usage in |enable Maven usage in other |others JVM languages|JVM languages -- 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 1155210] New: Review Request: compat-drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155210 Bug ID: 1155210 Summary: Review Request: compat-drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: robinlee.s...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/compat-drumstick.spec SRPM URL: http://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/compat-drumstick-0.5.0-10.fc20.src.rpm Description: The drumstick library is a C++ wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface, using Qt4 objects, idioms and style. The ALSA sequencer interface provides software support for MIDI technology on GNU/Linux. Fedora Account System Username: cheeselee -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155210] Review Request: compat-drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155210 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||compat-drumstick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155210] Review Request: compat-drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155210 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org Blocks||928937 (qt-reviews) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=928937 [Bug 928937] Qt-related package review tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 839071] Review Request: python-flask-babel - Adds i18n/l10n support to Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839071 Jordan OMara jom...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jom...@redhat.com --- Comment #22 from Jordan OMara jom...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-flask-babel New Branches: epel7 Owners: pcpa jomara InitialCC: pcpa Need to add epel7 branch. 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 1145443] Review Request: python-pdfkit - Python 2 wrapper for wkhtmltopdf utility to convert HTML to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145443 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1145443] Review Request: python-pdfkit - Python 2 wrapper for wkhtmltopdf utility to convert HTML to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145443 --- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1151843] Review Request: perl-WebService-Dropbox - Perl interface to Dropbox API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1151843 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1151843] Review Request: perl-WebService-Dropbox - Perl interface to Dropbox API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1151843 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- shutter-0.93-1.fc21,perl-WebService-Dropbox-1.22-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/shutter-0.93-1.fc21,perl-WebService-Dropbox-1.22-2.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 1151843] Review Request: perl-WebService-Dropbox - Perl interface to Dropbox API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1151843 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- shutter-0.93-1.fc20,perl-WebService-Dropbox-1.22-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/shutter-0.93-1.fc20,perl-WebService-Dropbox-1.22-2.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 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879
Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||d...@der-flo.net
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@der-flo.net
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net ---
Issues
==
[ ]: To create the tarball please take a look at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Github
[ ]: Please set URL to https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools
[ ]: Don't forgett to mention the GPLv2 in nl802154.h
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
GPL (v2), Unknown or generated. 9 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/flo/review/1154879-wpan-
tools/licensecheck.txt
--- nl802154.h is licensed under GPLv2
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation
[Bug 742389] Review Request: gtk-unico-engine - Unico Gtk+ theming engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742389 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- gtk-unico-engine-1.0.3-0.6.20140109bzr152.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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 1155099] Review Request: dbacl -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155099 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added CC||volke...@gmx.at Summary|dbacl |Review Request: dbacl - --- Comment #1 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at --- Your URL doesn't work. Please also update your ticket according to the guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Contributor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(d...@der-flo.net) --- Comment #2 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com --- Issues == [ ]: To create the tarball please take a look at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/ SourceURL#Github No, I'm packaging on an explicit tagged version not some random git commit. [ ]: Please set URL to https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools Why, the overall site covering all things on the project is the one that I have already set for the URL. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879
Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(d...@der-flo.net) |
--- Comment #3 from Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net ---
(In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #2)
Issues
==
[ ]: To create the tarball please take a look at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/
SourceURL#Github
No, I'm packaging on an explicit tagged version not some random git commit.
Alternatively, Source0 could also be specified as follows:
https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
I suggest using URLs in Source0 because it makes it easier to follow up.
[ ]: Please set URL to https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools
Why, the overall site covering all things on the project is the one that I
have already set for the URL.
The overall site offers more than just wpan-tools. Using
https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools you are automatically directed to the
right project.
Cheers,
Flo
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155240] New: Review Request: gr-rds - GNU Radio FM RDS Receiver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155240 Bug ID: 1155240 Summary: Review Request: gr-rds - GNU Radio FM RDS Receiver Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: d...@danny.cz QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/gr-rds.spec SRPM URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/gr-rds-0-0.2.20141006git841b6307.fc21.src.rpm Description: GNU Radio FM RDS Receiver Fedora Account System Username: sharkcz -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155240] Review Request: gr-rds - GNU Radio FM RDS Receiver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155240 Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jskar...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879
--- Comment #4 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Florian der-flo Lehner from comment #3)
(In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #2)
Issues
==
[ ]: To create the tarball please take a look at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/
SourceURL#Github
No, I'm packaging on an explicit tagged version not some random git commit.
Alternatively, Source0 could also be specified as follows:
https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-
%{version}.tar.gz
I suggest using URLs in Source0 because it makes it easier to follow up.
You can suggest but ultimately it's the packagers choice, not a required hard
requirement on packaging.
[ ]: Please set URL to https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools
Why, the overall site covering all things on the project is the one that I
have already set for the URL.
The overall site offers more than just wpan-tools. Using
https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools you are automatically directed to
the right project.
wpan-tools is one component in the whole project, just like the gnome project
or any number other large projects. I don't see the point in pointing to the
web interface of the git scm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1108813] Review Request: python-ZEO - Client-server storage implementation for ZODB
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1108813 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-ZEO-4.0.0-1.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 1152963] Review Request: indi-eqmod - INDI driver for SkyWatcher
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152963 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- indi-eqmod-0.9.9-2.20141015svn1783.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 1152966] Review Request: indi-gphoto - INDI driver for many cameras using gPhoto
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152966 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- indi-gphoto-0.9.9-2.20141015svn1783.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 1155210] Review Request: compat-drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155210 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org --- Looks good, I think the only thing is going to be the bikeshedding about the name. I know I also used the compat-drumstick name in our e-mail discussion, but actually, there are people in Fedora who strongly believe that compat-* should only be used for the compat packages without a -devel package that we provide for third-party binaries, and we should rather use a version suffix. In this case, that would be drumstick0 or drumstick05, or maybe drumstick-qt4. I don't have a strong opinion either way, I'm going to ask on #fedora-kde IRC. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879
--- Comment #5 from Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net ---
(In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #4)
(In reply to Florian der-flo Lehner from comment #3)
(In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #2)
Issues
==
[ ]: To create the tarball please take a look at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/
SourceURL#Github
No, I'm packaging on an explicit tagged version not some random git
commit.
Alternatively, Source0 could also be specified as follows:
https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-
%{version}.tar.gz
I suggest using URLs in Source0 because it makes it easier to follow up.
You can suggest but ultimately it's the packagers choice, not a required
hard requirement on packaging.
yes. you're right.
[ ]: Please set URL to https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools
Why, the overall site covering all things on the project is the one that I
have already set for the URL.
The overall site offers more than just wpan-tools. Using
https://github.com/linux-wpan/wpan-tools you are automatically directed to
the right project.
wpan-tools is one component in the whole project, just like the gnome
project or any number other large projects. I don't see the point in
pointing to the web interface of the git scm
I see your point and I'm ok with it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879 --- Comment #6 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com --- So the only other thing outstanding this licensing bits: --- nl802154.h is licensed under GPLv2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- libpuma-1.2-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libpuma-1.2-2.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 1135654] Review Request: libpuma - Library for parsing and manipulating C/C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135654 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879 --- Comment #7 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com --- SPEC: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/wpan-tools.spec SRPM: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/wpan-tools-0.1-2.fc21.src.rpm Updated for license -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879
Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net ---
This is a review *template*. Besides handling the [ ]-marked tests you are
also supposed to fix the template before pasting into bugzilla:
- Add issues you find to the list of issues on top. If there isn't such
a list, create one.
- Add your own remarks to the template checks.
- Add new lines marked [!] or [?] when you discover new things not
listed by fedora-review.
- Change or remove any text in the template which is plain wrong. In this
case you could also file a bug against fedora-review
- Remove the [ ] Manual check required, you will not have any such lines
in what you paste.
- Remove attachments which you deem not really useful (the rpmlint
ones are mandatory, though)
- Remove this text
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
GPL (v2), Unknown or generated. 9 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/flo/review/1154879-wpan-
tools/licensecheck.txt
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and
[Bug 1078371] Review Request: js-jquery1 - JavaScript DOM manipulation, event handling, and AJAX library - for legacy browsers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1078371 --- Comment #6 from T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com --- I was missing the '-s' argument to 'ln' in a few places. But in further testing I discovered that source maps don't work with those particular symlinks, and they really seem to be overkill, so I just removed them instead. -- Spec: https://patches.fedorapeople.org/jquery/js-jquery1.spec SRPM: https://patches.fedorapeople.org/jquery/js-jquery1-1.11.1-4.fc20.src.rpm * Tue Oct 21 2014 T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com - 1.11.1-4 - drop unneccessary symlinks -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879 --- Comment #9 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com --- New Package GIT Request === Package Name: wpan-tools Short Description: Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack Owners: pbrobinson Branches: F-21 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 1078368] Review Request: js-jquery - JavaScript DOM manipulation, event handling, and AJAX library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1078368 --- Comment #9 from T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com --- I was missing the '-s' argument to 'ln' in a few places. But in further testing I discovered that source maps don't work with those particular symlinks, and they really seem to be overkill, so I just removed them instead. -- Spec: https://patches.fedorapeople.org/jquery/js-jquery.spec SRPM: https://patches.fedorapeople.org/jquery/js-jquery-2.1.1-4.fc20.src.rpm * Tue Oct 21 2014 T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com - 2.1.1-4 - drop unneccessary symlinks -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1154879] Review Request: wpan-tools - Userspace tools for the Linux IEEE 802.15.4 stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154879 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1103414] Review Request: js-jquery-migrate - APIs and features removed from jQuery core
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103414 --- Comment #2 from T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com --- Spec: https://patches.fedorapeople.org/jquery/js-jquery-migrate.spec SRPM: https://patches.fedorapeople.org/jquery/js-jquery-migrate-1.2.1-3.fc20.src.rpm * Tue Oct 21 2014 T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com - 1.2.1-3 - typo and whitespace fixes -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 839071] Review Request: python-flask-babel - Adds i18n/l10n support to Flask applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839071 Jordan OMara jom...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117025] Review Request: rubygem-joiner - Builds ActiveRecord joins from association paths
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117025 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- rubygem-joiner-0.3.3-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-joiner-0.3.3-1.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 1117025] Review Request: rubygem-joiner - Builds ActiveRecord joins from association paths
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117025 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1117025] Review Request: rubygem-joiner - Builds ActiveRecord joins from association paths
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1117025 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- rubygem-joiner-0.3.3-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-joiner-0.3.3-1.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
