[Bug 1150054] Review Request: chrootuid - This tool provides su and chroot fuctionality in one program
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150054 Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amigo.el...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com --- Greetings, You don't need lines 39, 40, 15 if you are not building this package for EL5/F12 or below. Also please include chrootuid_license by %license instead of %doc and do not use %doc for man files, include them as a plain files. Please note that this is informal 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 1172525] Review Request: zbackup - A versatile deduplicating backup tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172525 --- Comment #5 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com --- For that moment, I've done preliminary reviews over following requests: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150054 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150566 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174290 I'll update this list ASAP. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173683] Review Request: postgresql-semver - A semantic version data type for PostgreSQL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173683
--- Comment #2 from Pavel Raiskup prais...@redhat.com ---
Created attachment 969469
-- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=969469action=edit
possible fixes
Per fedora-review script (unless you plan to build against EPEL5):
= MUST items =
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/pgsql,
/usr/share/pgsql, /usr/share/pgsql/extension
praiskup: we need to require postgresql-server (and ideally
MODULE_COMPAT)
[!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
praiskup: CFLAGS are inherited from postgresql-devel currently
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
praiskup: however, I would prefer pg-semver (semver is different project)
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
praiskup: postgresql-libs requirement is redundant
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
praiskup: we need to require postgresql-server
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[!]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: %clean present but not required
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1142407] Review Request: drpm - deltarpm manipulation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1142407 Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amigo.el...@gmail.com --- Comment #19 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com --- Greetings, a few comments on your spec. 1. Could you enable hardened build (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE)? It seems that you package is building successfully with PIE enabled; 2. Use %license for license information insted of %doc. Thanks! Please note that this is informal 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 1174650] New: Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 Bug ID: 1174650 Summary: Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: puiterw...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//ipsilon.spec SRPM URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//ipsilon-0.3.0-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Ipsilon is a multi-protocol Identiy Provider service. Its function is to bridge authentication providers and applications to achieve Single Sign On and Federation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 --- Comment #1 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8395432 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1168692] Review Request: zram-swap - Enable compressed swap in memory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1168692 Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amigo.el...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com --- Greetings, a few comments: 1. Why not to push latest SPEC to your pull-request? I mean this: https://github.com/mystilleef/FedoraZram/pull/12/files It could be merged and then you can use upstream SOURCE. 2. You could easily remove empty %build from your SPEC. 3. Package name is misleading. It's not related to zswap so you should probably rename it to something like zramctl. 4. Why you don't want to include zramstat? It was very useful util. 5. Why you decided to use manual install instead of %makeinstall? Thanks! Please note that this is informal 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 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141
Laurence Field laurence.fi...@cern.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||laurence.fi...@cern.ch
--- Comment #3 from Laurence Field laurence.fi...@cern.ch ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[!]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
BSD (2 clause), Unknown or generated. 31 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/lfield/1172141-pakiti/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: %defattr present but not needed
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
[!]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: %clean present but not required
[-]: 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.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: 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
[Bug 1174408] Review Request: libblockdev - A library for low-level manipulation with block devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174408 Šimon Lukašík sluka...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sluka...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sluka...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Šimon Lukašík sluka...@redhat.com --- Looks promising, I will take a look. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 --- Comment #4 from Laurence Field laurence.fi...@cern.ch --- As already mentioned please check the license. Also the rpm group and spellings in the spec file. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 --- Comment #10 from Andreas Schneider a...@redhat.com --- Package updated: Spec URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/resolv_wrapper/resolv_wrapper.spec SRPM URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/resolv_wrapper/resolv_wrapper-1.1.0-2.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 1120771] Review Request: uronode - Alternative packet radio system for Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120771 Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-12-16 04:35:34 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1121115] Review Request: axmail - UROnode addon - an SMTP mailbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121115 Bug 1121115 depends on bug 1120771, which changed state. Bug 1120771 Summary: Review Request: uronode - Alternative packet radio system for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120771 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 891139] Review Request: perl-Net-IDN-Encode - Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=891139 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Net-IDN-Encode-2.201-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Net-IDN-Encode-2.201-2.el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1129429] Review Request: ccnet - A framework for writing networked applications in C
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129429
Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amigo.el...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com ---
Greetings,
a few comments on this review request:
1. Your packages (seafile and ccnet) both introduces build time requirements
(cross-package BuildRequires) so you should setup boostraping properly:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Bootstrapping
2. As you are packaging snapshot, you should use another name for the package:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Github
3. You should consider using %makeinstall macros instead of make install
DESTDIR=%{buildroot}:
# rpm -E %makeinstall
4. You should consider enabling hardened builds:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE
5. You should use %license for license information instead of %doc.
Please note that this is informal 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 1160671] Review Request: seafile - Cloud storage system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160671
Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amigo.el...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com ---
Greetings,
a few comments on this review request:
1. Your packages (seafile and ccnet) both introduces build time requirements
(cross-package BuildRequires) so you should setup boostraping properly:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Bootstrapping
2. As you are packaging snapshot, you should use another name for the package:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Github
3. You should consider using %makeinstall macros instead of make install
DESTDIR=%{buildroot}:
# rpm -E %makeinstall
4. You should consider enabling hardened builds:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE
5. You should use %license for license information instead of %doc.
6. Your package should contain correct .desktop file:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files
7. Use %{name}.1.* instead of %{name}.1.gz, since the compression method might
change at some point.
Please note that this is informal 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 1172525] Review Request: zbackup - A versatile deduplicating backup tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172525 --- Comment #6 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com --- Additional reviews: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1142407 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1168692 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160671 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129429 If someone could advice me something that could increase review speed I'll much appreciate this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1160671] Review Request: seafile - Cloud storage system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160671 --- Comment #2 from Nikos Roussos comzer...@fedoraproject.org --- Thanks. I'll check all these in detail. Just a quick reply on comment 2. This is not a snapshot, but guidelines suggest I reference the source by commit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1120771] Review Request: uronode - Alternative packet radio system for Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120771 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- uronode-2.2-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/uronode-2.2-1.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 1120771] Review Request: uronode - Alternative packet radio system for Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120771 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- uronode-2.2-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/uronode-2.2-1.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 Michael Adam ma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Michael Adam ma...@redhat.com --- Thanks. The updates addresses all my concenrs. The licensing is OK, since the shipped files are all BSD, as the package, only parts of the test cases contain GPL code. == Good to go. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 Andreas Schneider a...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Andreas Schneider a...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: resolv_wrapper Short Description: A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking Upstream URL: http://cwrap.org/resolv_wrapper.html Owners: asn jhrozek obnox Branches: f20 f21 el6 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1160671] Review Request: seafile - Cloud storage system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160671
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Nikos Roussos from comment #2)
Thanks. I'll check all these in detail. Just a quick reply on comment 2.
This is not a snapshot, but guidelines suggest I reference the source by
commit
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github
Then you should define source properly.
Something like https://github.com/haiwen/%{name}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz
It wasn't obvious that c81b8c8ef32dae6ae9b8cc9d3a2bb8cbada08c13 was tagged
3.1.8.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1158929] Review Request: py3status - An extensible i3status wrapper written in python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1158929 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- py3status-1.6-1.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/py3status-1.6-1.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 168831] Review Request: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=168831 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||psab...@redhat.com --- Comment #7 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Luigi Iotti from comment #6) May I ask if Steve is going to maintain this package even in Epel7. I built the current Epel6 src rpm (perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages-2.33-8.el6.src.rpm) in 7 and everything seems to work. Nope but I am :) -- 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 168831] Review Request: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=168831 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages New Branches: epel7 Owners: psabata InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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 809806] Review Request: perl-Devel-Autoflush - Set autoflush from the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809806 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Devel-Autoflush-0.06-3.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Devel-Autoflush-0.06-3.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 809806] Review Request: perl-Devel-Autoflush - Set autoflush from the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809806 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Devel-Autoflush-0.06-3.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Devel-Autoflush-0.06-3.el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174030] Review Request: golang-github-appc-spec - Schema defs and tools for app container specification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174030 Jan Chaloupka jchal...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |golang-github-appc-spec - |golang-github-appc-spec - |Schema defs and tools for |Schema defs and tools for |app container spec |app container specification Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jan Chaloupka jchal...@redhat.com --- Change summary from: Summary:Schema defs and tools for app container spec into Summary:Schema defs and tools for app container specification The file conforms to the current Go packaging draft. Approved -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173109] Review Request: python-pint - Physical quantities module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173109 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-pint-0.6-2.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pint-0.6-2.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173109] Review Request: python-pint - Physical quantities module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173109 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 1173109] Review Request: python-pint - Physical quantities module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173109 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-pint-0.6-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pint-0.6-2.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 1174479] Review Request: beets - Music library manager and MusicBrainz tagger
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174479 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||socho...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com --- You are missing quite a few optional plugin dependencies. I'd suggest either removing those plugins or actually pulling in the dependencies. One possibility would be to add per-plugin %package declarations so you don't pull in unnecessary things but allow people to install optionally. See http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/media-sound/beets/beets-1.3.3-r1.ebuild?view=markup for example of missed things. It's an older version so there might be more things missing... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1150054] Review Request: chrootuid - This tool provides su and chroot fuctionality in one program
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150054 --- Comment #4 from Mikhail mikhail_campos-guada...@epam.com --- Thank you for informal review. Updated spec URL: https://plageat.fedorapeople.org/chrootuid.spec Updated src URL: https://plageat.fedorapeople.org/chrootuid-1.3-2.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 168831] Review Request: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=168831 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 168831] Review Request: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=168831 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1169492] Review Request: abc - Sequential logic synthesis and formal verification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1169492 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 1169492] Review Request: abc - Sequential logic synthesis and formal verification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1169492 --- Comment #8 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 1170664] Review Request: python-mistune - Markdown parser for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170664 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1170664] Review Request: python-mistune - Markdown parser for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170664 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 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 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 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 --- Comment #13 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 1174021] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-semver - Go semantic versioning library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174021 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 1174290] Review Request: scalasca - Toolset for scalable performance analysis of large-scale parallel applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174290 --- Comment #2 from Dave Love d.l...@liverpool.ac.uk --- The rm -rf is what the template installs. I wouldn't rule it out on EPEL5, though I'm unlikely to want it on our EPEL5 cluster, and the dependencies aren't currently available. What is %license? I treated COPYING the same way as the example in the guidelines, and like every other package I've seen, as far as I can tell. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174021] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-semver - Go semantic versioning library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174021 --- Comment #4 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 1172525] Review Request: zbackup - A versatile deduplicating backup tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172525 --- Comment #7 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Poring over the spec file, sources, and resulting RPMS is still required, unless we develop an AI to do it ;). There are automated tools, which catch some more errors, but yield many false positives, so their output still needs to be trimmed: rpmlint 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 1174749] Failed to start httpd service on Fedora 20 (with packstack utility)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174749 Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||package-review@lists.fedora ||project.org Component|httpd |Package Review Assignee|jkal...@redhat.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #1 from Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com --- I think this is because of non-existing /var/cache/mod_ssl/scache. In Fedora, we are using following SSLSessionCache by default: SSLSessionCache shmcb:/run/httpd/sslcache(512000) If you supply different directory to your httpd.conf (or if another utility does that), you should created that directory manually (or the utility should do that for you). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174749] Failed to start httpd service on Fedora 20 (with packstack utility)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174749 Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ape...@gmail.com, ||gcham...@redhat.com, ||gdubr...@redhat.com, ||ichav...@redhat.com, ||ita...@ispbrasil.com.br, ||karlthe...@gmail.com, ||mm...@redhat.com, ||p...@draigbrady.com, ||soc...@v3.sk Component|Package Review |openstack-packstack Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mm...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174749] Failed to start httpd service on Fedora 20 (with packstack utility)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174749 Martin Magr mm...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aort...@redhat.com, ||der...@redhat.com, ||yey...@redhat.com Component|openstack-packstack |openstack-packstack Version|20 |Havana Product|Fedora |RDO QA Contact|extras...@fedoraproject.org |aje...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 --- Comment #5 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- Hi Laurence, Thank you for the review Concerning the problem you reported : - RPMGroup : Fixed. This is now converted to a more adapted group for EPEL5 compat - License: Fixed. BSD has been added as supplementar valid license. - spelling error: false error, no correction. Here they are : Spec URL: https://grid-deployment.web.cern.ch/grid-deployment/dms/lcgutil/tar/pakiti/pakiti.spec SRPM URL: https://grid-deployment.web.cern.ch/grid-deployment/dms/lcgutil/tar/pakiti/pakiti-3.0.0-1.el6.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 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 --- Comment #6 from Laurence Field laurence.fi...@cern.ch --- linux - Linux distro - distribution openssl - OpenSSL -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174290] Review Request: scalasca - Toolset for scalable performance analysis of large-scale parallel applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174290 --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Dave Love from comment #2) The rm -rf is what the template installs. I wouldn't rule it out on EPEL5, though I'm unlikely to want it on our EPEL5 cluster, and the dependencies aren't currently available. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean What is %license? I treated COPYING the same way as the example in the guidelines, and like every other package I've seen, as far as I can tell. https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Use_license_macro_in_RPMs_for_packages_in_Cloud_Image -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 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 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- resolv_wrapper-1.1.0-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/resolv_wrapper-1.1.0-2.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 1172525] Review Request: zbackup - A versatile deduplicating backup tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172525 --- Comment #8 from Vladimir Stackov amigo.el...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #7) Poring over the spec file, sources, and resulting RPMS is still required, unless we develop an AI to do it ;). There are automated tools, which catch some more errors, but yield many false positives, so their output still needs to be trimmed: rpmlint fedora-review Thank you for your reply! I'm not pushing, just thinking out loud :) BTW What was the average informal review threshold for new packagers? I just wanted to know if I need to write more or just to wait for some response. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172705] Review Request: kde-plasma-networkmanagement-extras - NetworkManager KDE Extras
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172705 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 Laurence Field laurence.fi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added 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 1172705] Review Request: kde-plasma-networkmanagement-extras - NetworkManager KDE Extras
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172705 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- kde-plasma-networkmanagement-extras-0.9.0.9-1.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kde-plasma-networkmanagement-extras-0.9.0.9-1.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172534] Review Request: resolv_wrapper - A wrapper for dns name resolving or dns faking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172534 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- resolv_wrapper-1.1.0-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/resolv_wrapper-1.1.0-2.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172525] Review Request: zbackup - A versatile deduplicating backup tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172525 --- Comment #9 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Frankly, I think this is one of the weak spots in the process, because of its unpredictability (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 seems rather depressing). I'd wait a few days and send a message to fedora-devel that you're looking for a sponsor if no one shows up. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|d...@der-flo.net |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #7 from Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net --- Obviously my opinion does not matter. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1166897] Review Request: mono-nat - Mono library for automatic port forwarding
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1166897 --- Comment #7 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms --- (In reply to Björn besser82 Esser from comment #6) Currently package FTBFS… … If you want to have the files located on github, use the *complete* github-tarball instead… As it turns out, the github tarball luckily includes LICENSE and AUTHORS. Unfortunately, this tarball does not provide any Makefile nor Makefile.in files, but Makefile.am only. I tried to tweak that somehow with autoreconf or automake, but without any success so far. Please help to use automake properly. Otherwise, I would suggest to leave mono-nat as dead as it is (to not wake up any bad zombie). For reference, I'll upload the spec file without any claim to fix FTBFS. https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/mono/mono-nat/mono-nat.spec Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.JMcPjo + umask 022 + cd /home/build/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd Mono.Nat-Mono.Nat-1.1.0 + pushd src ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/Mono.Nat-Mono.Nat-1.1.0/src ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/Mono.Nat-Mono.Nat-1.1.0 + autoreconf -i configure.ac:5: installing './install-sh' configure.ac:5: installing './missing' Makefile.include:65: error: 'pkglibdir' is not a legitimate directory for 'SCRIPTS' Mono.Nat/Makefile.am:96: 'Makefile.include' included from here autoreconf: automake failed with exit status: 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.JMcPjo (%build) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1166897] Review Request: mono-nat - Mono library for automatic port forwarding
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1166897 Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||NotReady -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174408] Review Request: libblockdev - A library for low-level manipulation with block devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174408
--- Comment #2 from Šimon Lukašík sluka...@redhat.com ---
First couple of ideas:
- There is no documentation for each plug-in. It is not the must for me, but
it would be great to have a few words about each plug-in.
- name of library: libbd, I am afraid to use libbd as library name. Light
search on web for libdb gives some results. What do you think about possible
collisions?
- package name is libblockdev
- lib name is bd.
- header files are in blockdev directory
I am not sure what can break if those are not consistent.
- Quoting the Fedora guidelines:
In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require
the base package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa}
- requires from libblockdev-plugins-all should imho also put the fully
versioned dependency in. What if I want to install libblockdev-plugins-all.i686
on my box?
- spell-check says that metapackage is not word, 'meta-package' will do it.
What are your thoughts, Vraťo?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-review+ |needinfo?(Laurence.Field@ce ||rn.ch) --- Comment #8 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- %clean section is not required any more - same goes to %defattr and - cleaning up buildroot in install step. Laurence, did you saw this was already assigned to Florian? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 Laurence Field laurence.fi...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(Laurence.Field@ce | |rn.ch) | --- Comment #9 from Laurence Field laurence.fi...@cern.ch --- I saw the comments but didn't realize he was offially reviewing, my mistake. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1159091] Review Request: openra - Libre/Free Real Time Strategy project that recreates the famous Command Conquer titles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1159091 --- Comment #2 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms --- FYI: Open.NAT¹ is a fork of the somehow dead project Mono.NAT (review request: bug #1166897), and so seems to be the new hope instaed. Asking upstream² what the plan is or should be. ¹ https://github.com/lontivero/Open.NAT ² https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/issues/7140 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 168831] Review Request: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=168831 --- Comment #10 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- Thank you. -- 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 1174097] Review Request: nodebrain - Rule Engine for State and Event Monitoring
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174097 --- Comment #2 from Ed Trettevik e...@nodebrain.org --- Here are the links to the NodeBrain koji scratch builds. f19 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8392033 f20 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8392110 f21 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8391318 f22 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8391202 The build with target f20 that failed, prior to the successful build on retry, shows what looks like a temporary connection error in root.log. (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8391841). DEBUG util.py:283: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//repos/f20-build/439790/armhfp/toplink/packages/gettext/0.18.3.2/3.fc20/armv7hl/gettext-0.18.3.2-3.fc20.armv7hl.rpm: [Errno 14] curl#7 - Failed connect to kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org:80; Connection refused So my package seems to build ok. However, I see comments about %license and %defattr in other package reviews that may apply, so I'll investigate that a bit and update the spec file if appropriate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 168831] Review Request: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=168831 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages-2.38-3.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages-2.38-3.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 --- Comment #2 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- Fix shebang removal New Spec URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//ipsilon.spec New SRPM URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//ipsilon-0.3.0-2.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 1007619] Review Request: eatmydata - Library and utilities designed to disable fsync
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007619 Derek Higgins der...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||der...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Derek Higgins der...@redhat.com --- I'd like to try and take over this package review request, I've updated the spec from Rino, spec: http://goodsquishy.com/downloads/eatmydata/libeatmydata.spec source rpm : http://goodsquishy.com/downloads/eatmydata/libeatmydata-105-1.fc20.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: derekh -- 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 1172141] Review Request: pakiti - Patching status monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172141 --- Comment #10 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- @Florian: Your opinion matter and your comments are naturally welcome. I fixed the issue you mention on the last version of the spec file. @Matthias: This is a package that targets EPEL5 too. The buildroot section and the clean section are needed for this plateform. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#BuildRoot_tag https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#Cleaning_BuildRoot_in_.25clean Concerning the %defattr, they are indeed not needed. However, rpmlint under EL5/EL6 spam a lot of warnings if %defattr missing. To be coherent, I usually keep it. If it is a problem from your perspective, I can remove 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 1147356] Review Request: python-tilestache - A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147356 Julien Enselme juj...@jujens.eu changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Julien Enselme juj...@jujens.eu --- (In reply to Scott K Logan from comment #8) Is there an official policy on -O1? I'd really like to see some documentation. I added it, in any case. I am not able to find where I first saw it. It is not mentionned on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python so I think it is not mandatory and it is just a habit I have. Not sure what you mean by the %doc comment, but I updated the upstream to use GitHub instead of Pypi, and the docs are all there now, as is the LICENSE file. The %doc problem is fixed now. I added a -examples subpackage as well. OK. Approuved! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1165688] Review Request: flannel - etcd address management agent for overlay networks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1165688 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-2-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-2-2.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 1141896] Review Request: cadvisor - Analyzes resource usage and performance characteristics of running containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1141896 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- cadvisor-0.6.2-0.1.git89088df.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cadvisor-0.6.2-0.1.git89088df.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 1141896] Review Request: cadvisor - Analyzes resource usage and performance characteristics of running containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1141896 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- cadvisor-0.6.2-0.1.git89088df.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cadvisor-0.6.2-0.1.git89088df.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 1169492] Review Request: abc - Sequential logic synthesis and formal verification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1169492 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 1169492] Review Request: abc - Sequential logic synthesis and formal verification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1169492 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- abc-1.01-2.hg20141130.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/abc-1.01-2.hg20141130.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 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650
Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rb...@redhat.com
--- Comment #3 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com ---
Original review as discussed over IRC:
Items that need work:
- Subpackage dependencies must be fixed. The providers should each have an
explicit Requires on the base ipsilon package.
- The base package should own correct directories where applicable.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/ipsilon,
/usr/share/ipsilon/ui, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ipsilon/info,
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ipsilon,
/usr/share/ipsilon/templates/install, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-
packages/ipsilon/providers, /usr/share/ipsilon/templates/login,
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ipsilon/login,
/usr/share/ipsilon/templates
- Please provide links to FPC tickets for temporary bundling exceptions for
javascript resources.
- One spelling error (s/agaist/against/).
= 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:
GPL (v3 or later), Unknown or generated. 29 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/threebean/1174650-ipsilon/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/ipsilon,
/usr/share/ipsilon/ui, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ipsilon/info,
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ipsilon,
/usr/share/ipsilon/templates/install, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-
packages/ipsilon/providers, /usr/share/ipsilon/templates/login,
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ipsilon/login,
/usr/share/ipsilon/templates
[!]: 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.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. (subpackage deps)
[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 102400 bytes in 6 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[x]: A
[Bug 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rb...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174893] New: Review Request: dnf-plugins-extras - Extras Plugins for DNF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174893 Bug ID: 1174893 Summary: Review Request: dnf-plugins-extras - Extras Plugins for DNF Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/dnf-plugins-extras.spec SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/dnf-plugins-extras-0.0.1-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: Extras Plugins for DNF. This package enhance DNF with snapper plugin. Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 --- Comment #4 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- - Fix typo - Add comments on why the test suite is not in check - The subpackages require the base package - Add link to FPC ticket for bundling exception request New Spec URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//ipsilon.spec New SRPM URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//ipsilon-0.3.0-3.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 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Ralph Bean rb...@redhat.com --- Package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 --- Comment #6 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ipsilon Short Description: An Identity Provider Server Upstream URL: https://fedorahosted.org/ipsilon/ Owners: puiterwijk simo Branches: f21 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174893] Review Request: dnf-plugins-extras - Extras Plugins for DNF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174893 Radek Holy rh...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rh...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rh...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- Thanks for reviewing! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1170802] Review Request: nodejs-relateurl - Minify URLs by converting them from absolute to relative
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170802 --- Comment #3 from Piotr Popieluch piotr1...@gmail.com --- License file is merged upstream, it is included as Source1. Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-relateurl.spec SRPM URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-relateurl-0.2.5-3.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 1147356] Review Request: python-tilestache - A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147356 --- Comment #10 from Scott K Logan log...@cottsay.net --- Thank you, Julien! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1147356] Review Request: python-tilestache - A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147356 --- Comment #11 from Scott K Logan log...@cottsay.net --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-tilestache Short Description: A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles Upstream URL: http://tilestache.org/ Owners: cottsay Branches: f19 f20 f21 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1147356] Review Request: python-tilestache - A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147356 Scott K Logan log...@cottsay.net 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 462253] Review Request: perl-Cache-FastMmap - Uses an mmap'ed file to act as a shared memory interprocess cache
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462253 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||psab...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #21 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Cache-FastMmap New Branches: epel7 Owners: psabata InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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 462253] Review Request: perl-Cache-FastMmap - Uses an mmap'ed file to act as a shared memory interprocess cache
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462253 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 462253] Review Request: perl-Cache-FastMmap - Uses an mmap'ed file to act as a shared memory interprocess cache
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462253 --- Comment #22 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1147356] Review Request: python-tilestache - A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147356 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 1147356] Review Request: python-tilestache - A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147356 --- 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 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 --- Comment #8 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 1174650] Review Request: ipsilon - An Identity Provider Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174650 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 1166697] Review Request: mingw-gstreamer1-plugins-good - MinGW build of GStreamer good plugins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1166697 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1166697] Review Request: mingw-gstreamer1-plugins-good - MinGW build of GStreamer good plugins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1166697 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-gstreamer1-plugins-good-1.4.4-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw-gstreamer1-plugins-good-1.4.4-1.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
