[Bug 1208839] Re-Review Request: gdouros-analecta-fonts - An ecclesiastic scripts font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208839 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package gdouros-analecta-fonts-4.02-0.2.20150430.fc22: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing gdouros-analecta-fonts-4.02-0.2.20150430.fc22' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-7591/gdouros-analecta-fonts-4.02-0.2.20150430.fc22 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1215575] Review Request: tangerine - Perl dependency metadata tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215575 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- tangerine-0.16-1.fc22, perl-Tangerine-0.15-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1203134] Review Request: php-pecl-apfd - Always Populate Form Data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203134 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||php-pecl-apfd-1.0.1-1.fc21 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-08 03:26:56 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-pecl-apfd-1.0.1-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 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 1203132] Review Request: php-pecl-json-post - JSON POST handler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203132 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||php-pecl-json-post-1.0.0-2. ||fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-08 03:26:00 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-pecl-json-post-1.0.0-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208835] Re-Review Request: gdouros-akkadian-fonts - A font for Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208835 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package gdouros-akkadian-fonts-7.13-0.2.20150430.fc22: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing gdouros-akkadian-fonts-7.13-0.2.20150430.fc22' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-7543/gdouros-akkadian-fonts-7.13-0.2.20150430.fc22 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1211362] Review Request: wildmagic5 - Wild Magic libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1211362 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||wildmagic5-5.13-9.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-08 03:32:04 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- wildmagic5-5.13-9.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 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 1208830] Re-Review Request: gdouros-aegean-fonts - A font for ancient scripts in the greater Aegean vicinity
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208830 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||gdouros-aegean-fonts-7.45-0 ||.2.20150430.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-08 03:32:26 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- gdouros-aegean-fonts-7.45-0.2.20150430.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214002] Review Request: toolshed - Cross-development toolkit for use with the Tandy Color Computer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214002 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- toolshed-20150416hg6f0dcb7087fe-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 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 1206946] Review Request: rubygem-occi-cli - Executable OCCI client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206946 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- Okay. * spec file clean * license acceptable on Fedora * can be built (on koji scratch build, at least on F-23, F-22) * can be installed * At least the following works, and occi --help works. $ ruby -e 'require occi-cli ; puts Occi::Cli::VERSION' 4.3.1 - This package (rubygem-occi-cli) is APPROVED by mtasaka - -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1206826] Review Request: z3 - Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206826 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|z3-4.3.2-3.20150329git.2960 |z3-4.3.2-3.20150329git.2960 |6b5.fc22|6b5.fc21 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- z3-4.3.2-3.20150329git.29606b5.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 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 1208838] Re-Review Request: gdouros-alexander-fonts - A Greek typeface inspired by Alexander Wilson
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208838 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package gdouros-alexander-fonts-5.01-0.2.20150430.fc22: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing gdouros-alexander-fonts-5.01-0.2.20150430.fc22' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-7621/gdouros-alexander-fonts-5.01-0.2.20150430.fc22 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1212157] Review Request: plotnetcfg - A tool to plot network configuration
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212157 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- plotnetcfg-0.3-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 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 1211346] Review Request: perl-Sys-Info-Base - Provides various system information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1211346 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Sys-Info-Base-0.7804-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 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 1208840] Re-Review Request: gdouros-musica-fonts - A font for musical symbols
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208840 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package gdouros-musica-fonts-3.12-0.2.20150430.fc22: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing gdouros-musica-fonts-3.12-0.2.20150430.fc22' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-7545/gdouros-musica-fonts-3.12-0.2.20150430.fc22 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208842] Re-Review Request: gdouros-symbola-fonts - A symbol font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208842 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||gdouros-symbola-fonts-7.21- ||0.3.20150430.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-08 03:36:25 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- gdouros-symbola-fonts-7.21-0.3.20150430.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1203134] Review Request: php-pecl-apfd - Always Populate Form Data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203134 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-pecl-apfd-1.0.1-1.fc21 |php-pecl-apfd-1.0.1-1.fc22 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- php-pecl-apfd-1.0.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 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 1204447] Review Request: python-geoip-geolite2 - GeoIP database access for Python under a BSD license
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204447
--- Comment #5 from Julien Enselme juj...@jujens.eu ---
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: Unknown or generated. 2 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/makerpm/python-geoip-
geolite2/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: 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 %license.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[X]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[X]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[X]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[X]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[X]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[X]: 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 the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]:
[Bug 1208833] Re-Review Request: gdouros-aegyptus-fonts - A font for Egyptian hieroglyphs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208833 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package gdouros-aegyptus-fonts-5.03-0.2.20150430.fc22: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing gdouros-aegyptus-fonts-5.03-0.2.20150430.fc22' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-7627/gdouros-aegyptus-fonts-5.03-0.2.20150430.fc22 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219819] Review Request: python-pyopencl - Python wrapper for OpenCL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219819 Igor Gnatenko i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1219815 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219815 [Bug 1219815] 2014.3.5 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219819] New: Review Request: python-pyopencl - Python wrapper for OpenCL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219819 Bug ID: 1219819 Summary: Review Request: python-pyopencl - Python wrapper for OpenCL 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/pyopencl/python-pyopencl.spec SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/pyopencl/python-pyopencl-2015.1-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: PyOpenCL makes it possible to access GPUs and other massively parallel compute devices from Python. Specifically, PyOpenCL provides Pythonic access to the OpenCL parallel computation API in a manner similar to the sister project `PyCUDA`. 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 1219807] New: Review Request: python-appdirs - Python module for determining platform-specific dirs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219807 Bug ID: 1219807 Summary: Review Request: python-appdirs - Python module for determining platform-specific dirs 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/pyopencl/python-appdirs.spec SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/pyopencl/python-appdirs-1.4.0-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: A small Python module for determining appropriate + platform-specific dirs, e.g. a user data dir. 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 1219807] Review Request: python-appdirs - Python module for determining platform-specific dirs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219807 Igor Gnatenko i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1219815 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219815 [Bug 1219815] 2014.3.5 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1147013] Review Request: proxychains-ng - Redirect connections through proxy servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147013 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@fedoraproject.org Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #48 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- * Modifying license file downstream - Well, even if rpmlint complains somehow, I am strongly against modifying license text downstream arbitrarily. License text change must be done upstream. Please pull the _actual_ upstream fix with the URL: https://github.com/rofl0r/proxychains-ng/commit/567935b1abb93af561600081461a46b89468b9ca * Relation with proxychains (In reply to Till Maas from comment #29) (In reply to Matthias Runge from comment #28) Is proxychanins-ng going to replace proxychains? or is it installable in parallel? I must have missed that in my earlier comment. sorry for the confusion. proxychains-ng is meant to replace proxychains i.e. the current plan is to retire proxychains when this review is finished. - Then please add some Obsoletes entry against proxychains. * NOTE: - Currently %_sysconfdir/proxychains.conf is also owned by the old proxychains, so installing both proxychains and proxychains-ng sees a conflict on %_sysconfdir/proxychains.conf . Anyway, adding Obsoletes or Conflicts against proxychains is currently needed (unless config file on proxychains-ng is changed). * Distro-specific configuration Adjust ~/.proxychains/proxychains.conf for your Proxy and use ProxyChains NG with proxychains4 application - If this application cannot be used as it is and some configuration by user is needed, I think some explanation file like README.fedora or so should be created, such explanation is not suitable for writing in Summary or %description. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219863] New: Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219863 Bug ID: 1219863 Summary: Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ds...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://dshea.fedorapeople.org/requests/python-requests-ftp.spec SRPM URL: https://dshea.fedorapeople.org/requests/python-requests-ftp-0.3.0-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Requests-FTP is an implementation of a very stupid FTP transport adapter for use with the awesome Requests Python library. Fedora Account System Username: dshea -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 453287] Review Request: perl-Term-ReadLine-Gnu - Perl extension for the GNU Readline/History Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453287 Charles R. Anderson c...@wpi.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@wpi.edu Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Charles R. Anderson c...@wpi.edu --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Term-ReadLine-Gnu New Branches: epel7 Owners: cra InitialCC: perl-Term-ReadLine-Gnu is needed by kpcli. -- 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 1219863] Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219863 Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|clum...@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 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|clum...@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 1147013] Review Request: proxychains-ng - Redirect connections through proxy servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147013 --- Comment #50 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- What I am saying is that information for configuration is not suitable for Summary or %description. * If some _Fedora-specific_ configuration by each user or system admin is needed, add README.fedora. * If some configuration by each user or system admin is needed by it is already written on the files shipped by the upstream, just say read this file for configuration on %description, or may be such notich is just not needed. * By the way, unless there is some reason, please make the installed package work as it is, without manual configuration by user. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1147013] Review Request: proxychains-ng - Redirect connections through proxy servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147013 --- Comment #49 from Pranav Kant pranav...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Mamoru TASAKA from comment #48) * Distro-specific configuration Adjust ~/.proxychains/proxychains.conf for your Proxy and use ProxyChains NG with proxychains4 application - If this application cannot be used as it is and some configuration by user is needed, I think some explanation file like README.fedora or so should be created, such explanation is not suitable for writing in Summary or %description. This configuration explanation is also available in README file that is shipped with the package. Do we still need to add a separate README.fedora specially for this configuration information again ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1217276] Review Request: TUI - Command framework to make cool looking scripts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1217276 --- Comment #3 from Simon A. Erat erat.si...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://sea.fedorapeople.org/review/tui/tui.spec SRPM URL: http://sea.fedorapeople.org/review/tui/tui-0.7.6-4.fc22.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1186819] Review Request: burp - Network backup / restore program
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186819 --- Comment #19 from Andrew Niemantsverdriet andrewniema...@gmail.com --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #18) ok, thanks for the explanation Yeah, no problem. When I first started using this project I too was confused with the version numbering. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219861] New: Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 Bug ID: 1219861 Summary: Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ds...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://dshea.fedorapeople.org/requests/python-requests-file.spec SRPM URL: https://dshea.fedorapeople.org/requests/python-requests-file-1.2-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Requests-File is a transport adapter for use with the Requests Python library to allow local filesystem access via file:// URLs. Fedora Account System Username: dshea -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 1219863] Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219863 Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 1197126] Review Request: perl-Test-Run-CmdLine - Run TAP tests from command line using the Test::Run module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197126 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 1207948] Review Request: dagger - A fast dependency injector for Android and Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207948 --- 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 1197605] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework - Web APIs for Django, made easy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197605 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 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 1197605] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework - Web APIs for Django, made easy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197605 --- Comment #11 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 1197126] Review Request: perl-Test-Run-CmdLine - Run TAP tests from command line using the Test::Run module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197126 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218127] Review Request: pagure - A git-centered forge
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218127 --- Comment #5 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com --- Small changes! * using python versionaed macros * Fixing systemd BR/R for pagure-milters subpackage to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd And adding %post %postun %preun scriptlets too * License is not installed when you just install pagure-miltes, since I can understand you may install it on a different machine than pagure, then add it. * I suggest using %license macro ;) * cleaning out buildroot 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 1172198] Review Request: golang-github-davecgh-go-spew - Implements a deep pretty printer for Go data structures to aid in debugging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172198 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|golang-github-davecgh-go-sp |golang-github-davecgh-go-sp |ew-0-0.3.git3e6e67c.fc20|ew-0-0.3.git3e6e67c.el6 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- golang-github-davecgh-go-spew-0-0.3.git3e6e67c.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 921134] Review Request: boost148 - The free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=921134 --- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- boost148-1.48.0-7.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219905] Review Request: python-cliff-tablib - Tablib formatters for python-cliff
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219905 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ape...@redhat.com, ||jruzi...@redhat.com Blocks||1187309 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187309 [Bug 1187309] New package - python-cliff-tablib -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1155051] Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155051 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 1155051] Review Request: jenkins-ldap-plugin - Jenkins LDAP Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155051 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218362] Review Request: richacls - Rich Access Control List utilities and dynamic library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218362 --- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- WARNING: Requested package name richacl doesn't match bug summary richacls -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219905] Review Request: python-cliff-tablib - Tablib formatters for python-cliff
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219905 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1194780 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194780 [Bug 1194780] New package - python-cliff-tablib -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 --- Comment #4 from David Shea ds...@redhat.com --- (In reply to David Shea from comment #3) Also there doesn't appear to be a %check that runs the tests/ directory. There is not, because it failed in copr due to locale junk that I assume is not available in mock. I promise to run the checks before I upload to pypi. And that was apparently something copr messed up. It worked fine in a scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9687495 Whatever. I'll revert https://github.com/dashea/requests-file/commit/164144e52f77c3e400cde7e0e297d660aef5b7d1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219863] Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219863
Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
[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.
[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 %license.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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 the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX is a
[Bug 1203801] Review Request: osbs - Python module and command line client for OpenShift Build Service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203801 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|osbs-0.2-2.c1216ba.fc22 |osbs-0.4-1.el6 --- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- osbs-0.4-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1199055] Review Request: mediawiki123 - A wiki engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199055 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mediawiki123-1.23.9-1.el7 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-08 12:39:57 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mediawiki123-1.23.9-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1032750] Review Request: golang-github-syndtr-gocapability - POSIX capability library for the Go programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032750 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|golang-github-syndtr-gocapa |golang-github-syndtr-gocapa |bility-0-0.9.git8e4cdcb.fc2 |bility-0-0.9.git8e4cdcb.el6 |0 | --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- golang-github-syndtr-gocapability-0-0.9.git8e4cdcb.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 921134] Review Request: boost148 - The free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=921134 --- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- boost148-1.48.0-7.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 921134] Review Request: boost148 - The free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=921134 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||boost148-1.48.0-7.el7 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-08 12:40:03 --- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- boost148-1.48.0-7.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1196361] Review Request: golang-github-gorilla-websocket - A WebSocket implementation for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196361 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|golang-github-gorilla-webso |golang-github-gorilla-webso |cket-0-0.2.gitecff5aa.fc21 |cket-0-0.2.gitecff5aa.el6 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- golang-github-gorilla-websocket-0-0.2.gitecff5aa.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219905] New: Review Request: python-cliff-tablib - Tablib formatters for python-cliff
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219905 Bug ID: 1219905 Summary: Review Request: python-cliff-tablib - Tablib formatters for python-cliff Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: karlthe...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-cliff-tablib.spec SRPM URL: https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-cliff-tablib-1.1-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: cliff-tablib is a set of formatter extensions for producing JSON, YAML, and HTML output in programs created with the cliff framework. Fedora Account System Username: hguemar -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1063060] Review Request: rubygem-websocket - Universal Ruby library to handle WebSocket protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1063060 Jon Ciesla limburg...@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 1063060] Review Request: rubygem-websocket - Universal Ruby library to handle WebSocket protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1063060 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- WARNING: Requested package name rubygem-webmock doesn't match bug summary rubygem-websocket -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218124] Review Request: kwalletmanager5 - Manage KDE passwords
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218124 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 1218124] Review Request: kwalletmanager5 - Manage KDE passwords
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218124 --- 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 1218788] Review Request: yast2-filesystem - YaST filesystem layout
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218788 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 1098965] Review Request: capstone - Multi-platform, multi-architecture disassembly framework.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1098965 Stefan Cornelius scorn...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment|0 |1 #1022824 is|| obsolete|| --- Comment #8 from Stefan Cornelius scorn...@redhat.com --- Created attachment 1023527 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1023527action=edit Updated spec file for 3.0.3 Updated spec file for 3.0.3. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9686947 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1203801] Review Request: osbs - Python module and command line client for OpenShift Build Service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203801 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|osbs-0.4-1.el6 |osbs-0.4-1.el7 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- osbs-0.4-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1147013] Review Request: proxychains-ng - Redirect connections through proxy servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147013 --- Comment #51 from Pranav Kant pranav...@gmail.com --- Updated links : http://glug.nith.ac.in/~pranavk/fedora/proxychains-ng.spec http://glug.nith.ac.in/~pranavk/fedora/proxychains-ng-4.8.1-7.fc22.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1215732] Review Request: pypy3 - Python 3 implementation with a Just-In-Time compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215732 --- Comment #24 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 1215732] Review Request: pypy3 - Python 3 implementation with a Just-In-Time compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215732 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 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com 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 1098965] Review Request: capstone - Multi-platform, multi-architecture disassembly framework.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1098965
--- Comment #10 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group)
bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
%files
%doc README LICENSE.TXT ChangeLog LICENSE_LLVM.TXT
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Licensing
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
%files devel
%doc
%files java
%doc
An empty %doc line is a no-op. Remember, %doc is not a section in the spec file
like %build or %install.
%{_includedir}/*
%exclude %{_libdir}
%{_libdir}/*.so
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/*
So, somebody added this unusual %exclude line without commenting on it anywhere
in the spec file. The %changelog doesn't tell why this was added. IMO, it is
the cause of a broken build as it hides files that ought to be packaged. Just
examine the contents of the capstone-devel package. There is no build-time
library!
%{_javadir}/
%{_javadir}/%{name}.jar
The first line already includes %{_javadir} and everything in it. The second
line is redundant.
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6949/9686949/build.log
Notice the errors in make check. Solution: Adjust runtime linker's search path
to make it find the freshly build shared lib.
+ make -j16
CC cs.o
CC MCInstrDesc.o
CC SStream.o
CC utils.o
Build output is non-verbose. One cannot verify which compiler flags have been
used actually:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219863] Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219863 David Shea ds...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from David Shea ds...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-requests-ftp Short Description: FTP transport adapter for python-requests Upstream URL: https://github.com/Lukasa/requests-ftp Owners: dshea Branches: f21 f22 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 1216055] Review Request: ardour4 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1216055 --- Comment #16 from Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Be from comment #15) The reasons for the status quo are two-fold: - Session files of Ardour v2 are incompatible with versions = 3. The later versions can migrate old sessions, but some information may be lost. - To introduce version 3 in the then current stable Fedora releases it needed to get a different name, hence ardour3. I've made a proposal on fedora-music-list how to deal with this issue in the future, to make transitions a little smoother and new/current versions easier to discover: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/music/2015-May/002005.html I'd appreciate your comments there. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861
--- Comment #1 from Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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.
[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.
[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 %license.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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 the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
---
Checking:
[Bug 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 --- Comment #2 from Chris Lumens clum...@redhat.com --- Blah, blah, blah. I'll let you decide if filesystem is a typo. I think we made that two words in anaconda. Also there doesn't appear to be a %check that runs the tests/ directory. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1098965] Review Request: capstone - Multi-platform, multi-architecture disassembly framework.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1098965 Stefan Cornelius scorn...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219122] Review Request: rubygem-webkit-gtk - Ruby binding of WebKitGTK+ using GTK3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219122
František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
LGPL (v2.1 or later).
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: 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 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]: 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
Ruby:
[x]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform
independent under %{gem_dir}.
[x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage
[x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated.
[x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name}
[x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel.
[x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro.
[x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch
[x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi).
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
Note: Only fonts in generated docs
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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.
[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
[Bug 1218788] Review Request: yast2-filesystem - YaST filesystem layout
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218788 --- 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 1215261] Review Request: pytimeparse - Time expression parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215261 --- Comment #7 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 1207948] Review Request: dagger - A fast dependency injector for Android and Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207948 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 1213976] Review Request: sqlite-jdbc - SQLite JDBC library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1213976 --- 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 1213976] Review Request: sqlite-jdbc - SQLite JDBC library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1213976 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 1215261] Review Request: pytimeparse - Time expression parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215261 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 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-files - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 --- Comment #3 from David Shea ds...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Chris Lumens from comment #2) Blah, blah, blah. I'll let you decide if filesystem is a typo. I think we made that two words in anaconda. We do, I'll change it in the spec. Also there doesn't appear to be a %check that runs the tests/ directory. There is not, because it failed in copr due to locale junk that I assume is not available in mock. I promise to run the checks before I upload to pypi. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1098965] Review Request: capstone - Multi-platform, multi-architecture disassembly framework.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1098965 Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #9 from Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com --- Well there is no need to add this bug to NEEDSPONSOR tracker; I submitted the package and am already sponsored. It would just slow down things unnecessarily. Doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to get a sponsor (would allow you to help maintaining the package) ... but this review process shouldn't be blocked by that. As for the updates thanks; I got sidetracked with other things after a few mail exchanges with upstream. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 453287] Review Request: perl-Term-ReadLine-Gnu - Perl extension for the GNU Readline/History Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453287 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 453287] Review Request: perl-Term-ReadLine-Gnu - Perl extension for the GNU Readline/History Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453287 --- Comment #12 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 1218362] Review Request: richacls - Rich Access Control List utilities and dynamic library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218362 Jon Ciesla limburg...@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 1218749] Review Request: yast2-devtools - YaST Development Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218749 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218749] Review Request: yast2-devtools - YaST Development Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218749 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 1219863] Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219863 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219863] Review Request: python-requests-ftp - FTP transport adapter for python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219863 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 1207948] Review Request: dagger - A fast dependency injector for Android and Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207948 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- dagger-1.2.2-2.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dagger-1.2.2-2.fc22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1204447] Review Request: python-geoip-geolite2 - GeoIP database access for Python under a BSD license
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204447 --- Comment #6 from Julien Enselme juj...@jujens.eu --- For your information, a bug asking to update python-GeoIP was filled a while ago: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1080885 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207948] Review Request: dagger - A fast dependency injector for Android and Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207948 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|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 1218362] Review Request: richacl - Rich Access Control List utilities and dynamic library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218362 --- Comment #16 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 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-file - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 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 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-file - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 --- Comment #6 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 1219861] Review Request: python-requests-file - Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219861 David Shea ds...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |python-requests-files - |python-requests-file - |Transport adapter for using |Transport adapter for using |file:// URLs with |file:// URLs with |python-requests |python-requests Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from David Shea ds...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-requests-file Short Description: Transport adapter for using file:// URLs with python-requests Upstream URL: https://github.com/dashea/requests-file Owners: dshea Branches: f21 f22 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 1127569] Review Request: libstrophe - A simple, lightweight C library for writing XMPP clients
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127569 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Assignee|rdie...@math.unl.edu|nob...@fedoraproject.org Last Closed|2015-04-05 13:49:28 |2015-05-08 14:42:17 --- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- so will you have updated/current links to add? If so, re-open when you do (but not before, there's little point keeping the review open for something that's not reviewable) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219948] New: Review Request: ardour2 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219948 Bug ID: 1219948 Summary: Review Request: ardour2 - Digital Audio Workstation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nphil...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/ardour2/ardour2.spec SRPM URL: https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/ardour2/ardour2-2.8.16-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: This package contains the legacy version 2 of Ardour. It is provided as a way to work on sessions created by this version. Please use the current version of Ardour for new projects. Ardour is a multichannel hard disk recorder (HDR) and digital audio workstation (DAW). It is capable of simultaneous recording 24 or more channels of 32 bit audio at 48kHz. Ardour is intended to function as a professional HDR system, replacing dedicated hardware solutions such as the Mackie HDR, the Tascam 2424 and more traditional tape systems like the Alesis ADAT series. It is also intended to provide the same or better functionality as software systems such as ProTools, Samplitude, Logic Audio, Nuendo and Cubase VST (we acknowledge these and all other names as trademarks of their respective owners). It supports MIDI Machine Control, and so can be controlled from any MMC controller, such as the Mackie Digital 8 Bus mixer and many other modern digital mixers. Fedora Account System Username: nphilipp -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
