[Bug 1270054] Review Request: golang-github-magiconair-properties - Java properties scanner for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270054 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-magiconair-properties-1.5.3-1.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 1270064] Review Request: golang-github-spf13-viper - Go configuration with fangs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270064 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-spf13-viper-0-0.1.gitbe5ff3e.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 1270064] Review Request: golang-github-spf13-viper - Go configuration with fangs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270064 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1270056] Review Request: golang-github-mattn-go-sqlite3 - Sqlite3 driver for go that using database/sql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270056 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-mattn-go-sqlite3-1.0.0-1.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 1269806] Review Request: golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go - AWS SDK for the Go programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269806 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go-0.9.5-1.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 1269806] Review Request: golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go - AWS SDK for the Go programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269806 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1270405] Review Request: native_client - Google Native Client Toolchain
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270405 Bug 1270405 depends on bug 1270355, which changed state. Bug 1270355 Summary: Review Request: nacl-binutils - A GNU collection of binary utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270355 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1270358] Review Request: nacl-newlib - C library intended for use on embedded systems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270358 Bug 1270358 depends on bug 1270355, which changed state. Bug 1270355 Summary: Review Request: nacl-binutils - A GNU collection of binary utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270355 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1270357] Review Request: nacl-gcc - Various compilers (C, C++) for nacl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270357 Bug 1270357 depends on bug 1270355, which changed state. Bug 1270355 Summary: Review Request: nacl-binutils - A GNU collection of binary utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270355 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1270355] Review Request: nacl-binutils - A GNU collection of binary utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270355 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-01-28 13:23:33 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1270322] Review Request: chromium - A WebKit (Blink) powered web browser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270322 Bug 1270322 depends on bug 1270355, which changed state. Bug 1270355 Summary: Review Request: nacl-binutils - A GNU collection of binary utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270355 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1270355] Review Request: nacl-binutils - A GNU collection of binary utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270355 --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System --- nacl-binutils-2.24-7.git1d8592c.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 1301143] Review Request: skopeo - Get information about Docker images without pulling them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 --- Comment #11 from Antonio Murdaca --- Jan, Lokesh, I should have fixed everything now. The only thing which doesn't work is removing the `cd $(pwd)/_build/...)` stuff in %install (as Jan suggested me to do) because I believe it is tied to $GO15VENDOREXPERIMENT and "go build" only works with "vendor/" if the current source being built lives under $GOPATH. (you can try this and see it can't resolves package dependencies) I've also tagged a new release (v0.1.3) Spec URL: https://github.com/runcom/skopeo/blob/master/skopeo.spec SRPM URL: http://runcom.ninja/skopeo-0.1.3-0.1.gitfdb5cac.fc23.src.rpm Koji builds: - f23: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12713377 - rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12713364 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301143] Review Request: skopeo - Get information about Docker images without pulling them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 --- Comment #10 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- runcom's scratch build of skopeo-0.1.3-0.1.git572a6b6.fc23.src.rpm for f23 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12713132 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302809] Review Request: ne - ne, the nice editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302809 Brandon Thomas 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 1302809] New: Review Request: ne - ne, the nice editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302809 Bug ID: 1302809 Summary: Review Request: ne - ne, the nice editor Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: bthoma...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/bthomas/ne/ne.git/tree/ne.spec?id=2b507b12e4a1a6d1b0cbd1012858d115462a285b SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bthomas/ne/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00156282-ne/ne-3.0.1-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: ne is a free (GPL'd) text editor based on the POSIX standard that runs (we hope) on almost any UN*X machine. ne is easy to use for the beginner, but powerful and fully configurable for the wizard, and most sparing in its resource usage. If you have the resources and the patience to use emacs or the right mental twist to use vi then probably ne is not for you. However, being fast, small, powerful and simple to use, ne is ideal for email, editing through phone line (or slow GSM/GPRS) connections and so on. Moreover, the internal text representation is very compact--you can easily load and modify very large files. Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12712599 Fedora Account System Username: bthomas -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301748] Review Request: pulp-ostree - Support for pulp-ostree content in the Pulp platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301748 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/pulp-ostree -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302288] Review Request: perl-Debug-ShowStuff - A collection of handy debugging routines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302288 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-Debug-ShowStuff-1.16-1 ||.fc24 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1282903] Review Request: oci-register-machine - Golang binary for registering OCI containers with systemd-machined
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282903 --- Comment #13 from Daniel Walsh --- BuildRequires: golang-github-cpuguy83-go-md2man -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301268] Review Request: python-netdiff - Python library for parsing network topology data (eg: dynamic routing protocols, NetJSON, CNML) and detect changes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301268 Germano Massullo changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1302770 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302770 [Bug 1302770] Review Request: python-coveralls - Coveralls.io is service to publish your coverage stats online with a lot of nice features -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302770] New: Review Request: python-coveralls - Coveralls.io is service to publish your coverage stats online with a lot of nice features
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302770 Bug ID: 1302770 Summary: Review Request: python-coveralls - Coveralls.io is service to publish your coverage stats online with a lot of nice features Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: germano.massu...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fa...@locati.cc, ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1301268 Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~germano/package_reviews/python-coveralls/python-coveralls.spec Fedora Account System Username: germano GPG key id: 50EDA884 EsteID (DIGI-ID E-RESIDENT) serial number 38601270070 I cannot post a src.rpm file because I obtain error message: <> and I cannot find where the problem is. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301268 [Bug 1301268] Review Request: python-netdiff - Python library for parsing network topology data (eg: dynamic routing protocols, NetJSON, CNML) and detect changes -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1292794] Review Request: openstack-magnum - Container Management project for OpenStack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292794 Stephen Gordon changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1302766 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302766 [Bug 1302766] Add Magnum support using puppet-magnum -- 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 1286772] Review Request: python-magnumclient - Client library for Magnum API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286772 Stephen Gordon changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1302766 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302766 [Bug 1302766] Add Magnum support using puppet-magnum -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302288] Review Request: perl-Debug-ShowStuff - A collection of handy debugging routines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302288 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Debug-ShowStuff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301023] Review Request: python-sphinx-autobuild - Watch a Sphinx directory and rebuild the documentation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301023 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-sphinx-autobuild -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300569] Review Request: langpacks - Langpacks meta-package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300569 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/langpacks -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302744] Review Request: python-resumable-urlretrieve - Small library to fetch files over HTTP and resuming their download
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302744 --- Comment #2 from Mathieu Bridon --- hguemar found we seem to be missing a few requirements here, the requirements.txt file contains: requests==2.7.0 py==1.4.30 pytest==2.7.3 https://github.com/danvk/RangeHTTPServer/tarball/ebb5c5d7af44b3279bdd4b57ddf3093eec3e8794#egg=rangehttpserver https://github.com/JukkaL/mypy/tarball/dcff596be878798fbd43af7b50d95c3eed7ebbc1#egg=mypy-lang The first one, requests, is already a Requires/BuildRequires in the spec file, though I didn't specify the version. The next one, py, is not used at all. It is a dependency of pytest though, which makes me think this requirements.txt file was generated with "pip freeze", rather than carefully curated by the author. Which means the versioned dependencies are probably "whatever was in the virtualenv" rather that trueliy required versions. The next one, pytest, is required for the unit tests. As such, I should definitely add it as a BuildRequires. And the last one, mypy, is the typing thing from Python 3.5, for older Python versions. Since I'm only planning on pushing this package in Rawhide, which has Python 3.5, then this dependency is unnecessary. Finally, there is the case of rangehttpserver, which is required for the tests, and therefore should be a BuildRequires. In summary, I need to add to this package: BuildRequires: python3-pytest BuildRequires: python3-rangehttpserver And then change %check to be: %check py.test-3 I'm going to submit a new Spec/SRPM that does just that. Unfortunately, rangehttpserver isn't in Fedora yet, so I'll need to submit a new review request for it. And in addition, it is not compatible with Python 3 yet: https://github.com/danvk/RangeHTTPServer/pull/12 So I guess we can leave this review request for the time being, until I get it all settled. Sorry for the trouble, and thanks hguemar for the quick comments on IRC! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1294865] Review Request: python3-six - Python 2 and 3 compatibility utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294865 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python3-six -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1288645] Review Request: teem - Libraries for scientific raster data processing and visualizing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288645 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/teem -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1289717] Review Request: viennacl - Linear algebra and solver library using CUDA, OpenCL, and OpenMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289717 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/viennacl -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003 --- Comment #14 from gil cattaneo --- Thanks! Request for new package https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/requests/3561 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1251689] Review Request: java-scrypt - Java implementation of scrypt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251689 Jonny Heggheim changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2016-01-28 09:15:41 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301143] Review Request: skopeo - Get information about Docker images without pulling them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 --- Comment #9 from Jan Chaloupka --- Some of them are already packaged, just with a different name. > should this binary have a golang(...)-like name resolvable via golang(...) > macro? No. golang(...) virtual provides is used only for dependencies > I've read golang binaries can be named without golang-github-* prefix so > this won't suffer from renaming Yeap. It can be named anyway you wish. All projects packaged in fedora with intent to provide at least one binary are named by repository. The standard way is to use project name. > (also this do not provide a devel package) As I mentioned above. At least you can provide devel package with no [Build]Requires for sake of analysis. The generated spec file already provides all code necessary. Just with some small modifications. > but just let me know and I'll move the repository as fast as I can > and fix what's needed If you use generated macros, it is two-liner fix -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301143] Review Request: skopeo - Get information about Docker images without pulling them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 --- Comment #8 from Antonio Murdaca --- (In reply to Jan Chaloupka from comment #7) > btw. a lot of new dependencies :) > > $ gofed repo2spec --detect github.com/runcom/skopeo --with-build --with-extra > Repo URL: github.com/runcom/skopeo > Commit: 572a6b6f537d71f7cabfdcfe185c6d7cb4367272 > Name: golang-github-runcom-skopeo > > (1/4) Checking if the package already exists in PkgDB > (2/4) Downloading tarball > (3/4) Generating spec file > (4/4) Discovering golang dependencies > Class: github.com/Azure/go-ansiterm (golang-github-Azure-go-ansiterm) > PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/Sirupsen/logrus (golang-github-Sirupsen-logrus) PkgDB=True > Class: github.com/codegangsta/cli (golang-github-codegangsta-cli) PkgDB=True > Class: github.com/docker/distribution (golang-github-docker-distribution) > PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/docker/docker (docker) PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/docker/engine-api (golang-github-docker-engine-api) > PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/docker/go-connections > (golang-github-docker-go-connections) PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/docker/go-units (golang-github-docker-go-units) PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/docker/libtrust (golang-github-docker-libtrust) PkgDB=True > Class: github.com/go-check/check (golang-github-go-check-check) PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/gorilla/context (golang-github-gorilla-context) PkgDB=True > Class: github.com/gorilla/mux (golang-github-gorilla-mux) PkgDB=True > Class: github.com/opencontainers/runc (golang-github-opencontainers-runc) > PkgDB=False > Class: github.com/vbatts/tar-split (golang-github-vbatts-tar-split) > PkgDB=False > Class: golang.org/x/net (golang-googlecode-net) PkgDB=True > > Spec file golang-github-runcom-skopeo.spec at > /home/jchaloup/Packages/reviews/skopeo/golang-github-runcom-skopeo/fedora/ > golang-github-runcom-skopeo Yes, those new dependencies come from the master branch, I can tag a new release and add all those dependencies :) (In reply to Jan Chaloupka from comment #6) > Wondering if it would be better to create github repository (e.g. > fedora/golang-reviews) and instead of posting links to spec to post links to > pull request and comment in the PR. Missing feature to comment lines of the > spec file. > > Well, the devel subpackage is usefull for analysis. When the devel > subpackage is present, it can be scanned for dependencies and other info > about the code. At the moment we are running simple scans of new builds of > golang projects in Koji. In future, we plan to report missing or broken > dependencies. So if you provide the devel subpackage, you get automatic > scans and reports about health of your package. > > Second, I would recommend to add some macro at the top of the spec. E.g. > commit, provider_prefix, import_path. They are used for automatic updates of > spec file (e.g. 'gofed bump') and in analysis (as described above). > > Third, you are using 'go build' inside Makefile. So your project can be > built on architectures with golang compiler only. If you move the commands > into %build section, you can use %gobuild macro a gain support for debugingo > and architectures with gcc-go compiler. > > You can play with gofed for a while, try to run: > # yum install gofed > $ gofed repo2spec --detect github.com/runcom/skopeo --with-build --with-extra > > Bad news is it depends on docker so the devel subpackage will not be > complete. The good new is you can build the project from bundled > dependencies. > > Lokesh, we should definitely do something about the docker. This is another > project that depends on it. > If this is happening we should at least > partially built the package from bundled and partially from debundled deps. This is what I'm actually doing - I'm removing each bundled deps with rm -rf /vendor and just leave under vendor the ones from docker which cannot be debundled :) > At this point this is out of the question as we are still missing automatic > tools that would do all the hard work for us. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003
Christos Triantafyllidis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #13 from Christos Triantafyllidis
---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #12)
> (In reply to Christos Triantafyllidis from comment #11)
> > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10)
> > > (In reply to Christos Triantafyllidis from comment #9)
> > > > I'm not sure how to test this. Would it be possible to provide a test
> > > > case?
> > > > I'd like to run a simple test run especially given the fact that %check
> > > > is
> > > > not included.
> > > maven build style not use and do not need the %check section
> >
> > I understand that this may not be used but I have no way to ensure that this
> > package actually does what it is supposed to do. Is there a simple unit test
> > I can use to cross-check it? If that requires mongo servers etc that is
> > something that I cannot test.
>
> MongoDB stuff in this case is useless, we can't run test suite
Agreed.
>
> > > > [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> > > > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
> > > > mongo-
> > > > java-driver2-javadoc
> > >
> > > No needed is a noarch package
> >
> > Not sure how the build arch relates to that. That more or less means that
> > whenever the mongo-java-driver2-javadoc it should pull mongo-java-driver2
> > too.
>
> Both packages are noarch. Why i should use ISA notation? No have sense for me
>
The ISA notation is not the point here. The point was that
mongo-java-driver2-javadoc doesn't have mongo-java-driver2 in its requires. I
checked again the mongo-java-driver-javadoc and I see that this is not the case
for it too so we can skip that too.
> > > >
> > > > I also see that compared to the original package the following
> > > > subpackages
> > > > are missing:
> > > > mongo-java-driver2-bson
> > > > mongo-java-driver2-bson-javadoc
> > > not needed
> >
> > Does this package provide also the bson package functionality? If not then
> > it won't be a 100% compat package. Excuse the fact that I have minimal java
> > knowledge, does that mean that no-one would ever need those bson
> > subpackages?
>
> Original mongo-java-driver spec file use ant build style, and split the
> library in two artifacts. With maven both libraries are contained in the
> same JAR file
> As compact package this work fine, for me.
>
Agreed. Thanks for clarifying.
I'm marking the review as completed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1094417] Review Request: levigo-jbig2-imageio - A Java ImageIO plugin for the JBIG2 bi-level image format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1094417 --- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/levigo-jbig2-imageio.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/levigo-jbig2-imageio-1.6.5-1.fc23.src.rpm - update to 1.6.5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302744] Review Request: python-resumable-urlretrieve - Small library to fetch files over HTTP and resuming their download
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302744 --- Comment #1 from Mathieu Bridon --- As hguemar found on IRC, the Spec URL had a typo, here's the correct info. --- Spec URL: https://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-resumable-urlretrieve.spec SRPM URL: https://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-resumable-urlretrieve-0.1.1-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Small library to fetch files over HTTP and resuming their download. Fedora Account System Username: bochecha -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302744] New: Review Request: python-resumable-urlretrieve - Small library to fetch files over HTTP and resuming their download
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302744 Bug ID: 1302744 Summary: Review Request: python-resumable-urlretrieve - Small library to fetch files over HTTP and resuming their download Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: boche...@daitauha.fr QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-resumable-urlretrieve.spen SRPM URL: https://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-resumable-urlretrieve-0.1.1-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Small library to fetch files over HTTP and resuming their download. Fedora Account System Username: bochecha -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301143] Review Request: skopeo - Get information about Docker images without pulling them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 --- Comment #7 from Jan Chaloupka --- btw. a lot of new dependencies :) $ gofed repo2spec --detect github.com/runcom/skopeo --with-build --with-extra Repo URL: github.com/runcom/skopeo Commit: 572a6b6f537d71f7cabfdcfe185c6d7cb4367272 Name: golang-github-runcom-skopeo (1/4) Checking if the package already exists in PkgDB (2/4) Downloading tarball (3/4) Generating spec file (4/4) Discovering golang dependencies Class: github.com/Azure/go-ansiterm (golang-github-Azure-go-ansiterm) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/Sirupsen/logrus (golang-github-Sirupsen-logrus) PkgDB=True Class: github.com/codegangsta/cli (golang-github-codegangsta-cli) PkgDB=True Class: github.com/docker/distribution (golang-github-docker-distribution) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/docker/docker (docker) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/docker/engine-api (golang-github-docker-engine-api) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/docker/go-connections (golang-github-docker-go-connections) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/docker/go-units (golang-github-docker-go-units) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/docker/libtrust (golang-github-docker-libtrust) PkgDB=True Class: github.com/go-check/check (golang-github-go-check-check) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/gorilla/context (golang-github-gorilla-context) PkgDB=True Class: github.com/gorilla/mux (golang-github-gorilla-mux) PkgDB=True Class: github.com/opencontainers/runc (golang-github-opencontainers-runc) PkgDB=False Class: github.com/vbatts/tar-split (golang-github-vbatts-tar-split) PkgDB=False Class: golang.org/x/net (golang-googlecode-net) PkgDB=True Spec file golang-github-runcom-skopeo.spec at /home/jchaloup/Packages/reviews/skopeo/golang-github-runcom-skopeo/fedora/golang-github-runcom-skopeo -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003
--- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Christos Triantafyllidis from comment #11)
> (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10)
> > (In reply to Christos Triantafyllidis from comment #9)
> > > I'm not sure how to test this. Would it be possible to provide a test
> > > case?
> > > I'd like to run a simple test run especially given the fact that %check is
> > > not included.
> > maven build style not use and do not need the %check section
>
> I understand that this may not be used but I have no way to ensure that this
> package actually does what it is supposed to do. Is there a simple unit test
> I can use to cross-check it? If that requires mongo servers etc that is
> something that I cannot test.
MongoDB stuff in this case is useless, we can't run test suite
> > > [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> > > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in mongo-
> > > java-driver2-javadoc
> >
> > No needed is a noarch package
>
> Not sure how the build arch relates to that. That more or less means that
> whenever the mongo-java-driver2-javadoc it should pull mongo-java-driver2
> too.
Both packages are noarch. Why i should use ISA notation? No have sense for me
> > >
> > > I also see that compared to the original package the following subpackages
> > > are missing:
> > > mongo-java-driver2-bson
> > > mongo-java-driver2-bson-javadoc
> > not needed
>
> Does this package provide also the bson package functionality? If not then
> it won't be a 100% compat package. Excuse the fact that I have minimal java
> knowledge, does that mean that no-one would ever need those bson subpackages?
Original mongo-java-driver spec file use ant build style, and split the library
in two artifacts. With maven both libraries are contained in the same JAR file
As compact package this work fine, for me.
> > > Also another thing that is not clear to me is why the SPEC file of
> > > mongo-java-driver is not used as a base for this given that the aim of a
> > > compat package should be to have the exactly the same functionality as the
> > > initial one that got updated.
> >
> > It is not necessary
> Yes but it would just make the SPEC preperation and the review much easier :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301143] Review Request: skopeo - Get information about Docker images without pulling them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 --- Comment #6 from Jan Chaloupka --- Wondering if it would be better to create github repository (e.g. fedora/golang-reviews) and instead of posting links to spec to post links to pull request and comment in the PR. Missing feature to comment lines of the spec file. Well, the devel subpackage is usefull for analysis. When the devel subpackage is present, it can be scanned for dependencies and other info about the code. At the moment we are running simple scans of new builds of golang projects in Koji. In future, we plan to report missing or broken dependencies. So if you provide the devel subpackage, you get automatic scans and reports about health of your package. Second, I would recommend to add some macro at the top of the spec. E.g. commit, provider_prefix, import_path. They are used for automatic updates of spec file (e.g. 'gofed bump') and in analysis (as described above). Third, you are using 'go build' inside Makefile. So your project can be built on architectures with golang compiler only. If you move the commands into %build section, you can use %gobuild macro a gain support for debugingo and architectures with gcc-go compiler. You can play with gofed for a while, try to run: # yum install gofed $ gofed repo2spec --detect github.com/runcom/skopeo --with-build --with-extra Bad news is it depends on docker so the devel subpackage will not be complete. The good new is you can build the project from bundled dependencies. Lokesh, we should definitely do something about the docker. This is another project that depends on it. If this is happening we should at least partially built the package from bundled and partially from debundled deps. At this point this is out of the question as we are still missing automatic tools that would do all the hard work for us. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003
--- Comment #11 from Christos Triantafyllidis
---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10)
> (In reply to Christos Triantafyllidis from comment #9)
>
> > The following are not blocking the review:
> > [!]: Latest version is packaged.
> > This is intended to be a compat package thus the latest 2.x version is
> > packaged.
> > [!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
> > Clarified in the comment in the spec and confirmed that the original package
> > doesn't include %check too
> >
> > The following need to be addressed:
> > [?]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
> > While I don't see anything bundled, I see the following explicit provides:
> > - bundle(apache-commons-codec)
> > - bundle(jcip-annotations)
> > - bundle(postgresql-jdbc)
>
> Those files are modifications of code included in:
> apache-commons-codec src/main/com/mongodb/util/Base64Codec.java
> jcip-annotations src/main/org/bson/util/annotations/*
> postgresql-jdbc src/main/org/bson/io/UTF8Encoding.java
> Now, is no more required ask an FPC exception if in the
> spec file are explained the bundles libraries
>
I missed that change in the guidelines. Confirmed!
> > [?]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
> > Again the same provides as above, why are those explicitly defined? I don't
> > see the original package to provide those.
> what packages?
I was referring to the current mongo-java-driver. Looks like that was a miss on
the original package.
> > [?]: Package functions as described.
> > I'm not sure how to test this. Would it be possible to provide a test case?
> > I'd like to run a simple test run especially given the fact that %check is
> > not included.
> maven build style not use and do not need the %check section
I understand that this may not be used but I have no way to ensure that this
package actually does what it is supposed to do. Is there a simple unit test I
can use to cross-check it? If that requires mongo servers etc that is something
that I cannot test.
> > [!]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even
> > when building with ant
> already installed using %mvn_install instruction
Agreed!
> > [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in mongo-
> > java-driver2-javadoc
>
> No needed is a noarch package
Not sure how the build arch relates to that. That more or less means that
whenever the mongo-java-driver2-javadoc it should pull mongo-java-driver2 too.
> >
> > I also see that compared to the original package the following subpackages
> > are missing:
> > mongo-java-driver2-bson
> > mongo-java-driver2-bson-javadoc
> not needed
Does this package provide also the bson package functionality? If not then it
won't be a 100% compat package. Excuse the fact that I have minimal java
knowledge, does that mean that no-one would ever need those bson subpackages?
> > Also another thing that is not clear to me is why the SPEC file of
> > mongo-java-driver is not used as a base for this given that the aim of a
> > compat package should be to have the exactly the same functionality as the
> > initial one that got updated.
>
> It is not necessary
Yes but it would just make the SPEC preperation and the review much easier :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003
--- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Christos Triantafyllidis from comment #9)
> The following are not blocking the review:
> [!]: Latest version is packaged.
> This is intended to be a compat package thus the latest 2.x version is
> packaged.
> [!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
> Clarified in the comment in the spec and confirmed that the original package
> doesn't include %check too
>
> The following need to be addressed:
> [?]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
> While I don't see anything bundled, I see the following explicit provides:
> - bundle(apache-commons-codec)
> - bundle(jcip-annotations)
> - bundle(postgresql-jdbc)
Those files are modifications of code included in:
apache-commons-codec src/main/com/mongodb/util/Base64Codec.java
jcip-annotations src/main/org/bson/util/annotations/*
postgresql-jdbc src/main/org/bson/io/UTF8Encoding.java
Now, is no more required ask an FPC exception if in the
spec file are explained the bundles libraries
> [?]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
> Again the same provides as above, why are those explicitly defined? I don't
> see the original package to provide those.
what packages?
> [?]: Package functions as described.
> I'm not sure how to test this. Would it be possible to provide a test case?
> I'd like to run a simple test run especially given the fact that %check is
> not included.
maven build style not use and do not need the %check section
> [!]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even
> when building with ant
already installed using %mvn_install instruction
> [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in mongo-
> java-driver2-javadoc
No needed is a noarch package
>
> I also see that compared to the original package the following subpackages
> are missing:
> mongo-java-driver2-bson
> mongo-java-driver2-bson-javadoc
not needed
> Also another thing that is not clear to me is why the SPEC file of
> mongo-java-driver is not used as a base for this given that the aim of a
> compat package should be to have the exactly the same functionality as the
> initial one that got updated.
It is not necessary
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003
--- Comment #9 from Christos Triantafyllidis
---
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: "BSD (3 clause)", "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 119
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
~/1302003-mongo-java-driver2/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[?]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 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 %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
Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It
is pulled in by maven-local
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)
Maven:
[!]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even
when building with ant
[x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use .mfiles file list instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms
= 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.
[?]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requi
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003 --- Comment #8 from Christos Triantafyllidis --- Many thanks Severin, I'll proceed with the review then. Cheers, Christos -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302003] Review Request: mongo-java-driver2 - MongoDB Java driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302003 Severin Gehwolf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sgehw...@redhat.com Flags|needinfo?(oma...@redhat.com | |) | |needinfo?(jerb...@gmail.com | |) | --- Comment #7 from Severin Gehwolf --- (In reply to Christos Triantafyllidis from comment #5) > I still think that should be discussed with the package maintainer first. > > I'm CCing the package contacts for their point on that. > > If the only option is to introduce to introduce a new package we can proceed > with that approach. I'm OK with a 2.x compat package and I've just pushed the 3.x update to rawhide[1]. [1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12711384 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1273471] Review Request: python-anymarkup-core - The core library for anymarkup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273471 --- Comment #15 from Petr Viktorin --- Jan, are you planning to push the update to f23/f22? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301268] Review Request: python-netdiff - Python library for parsing network topology data (eg: dynamic routing protocols, NetJSON, CNML) and detect changes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301268 --- Comment #3 from Germano Massullo --- Added missing test requirements[1]. I will submit the updated spec file tonight [1]: https://github.com/ninuxorg/netdiff/blob/master/requirements-test.txt -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1266429] Review Request: cmark - CommonMark parsing and rendering
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266429 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- cmark-0.23.0-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b9f659fc81 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1266429] Review Request: cmark - CommonMark parsing and rendering
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266429 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- cmark-0.23.0-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-cac4f03fc2 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- cmark-0.23.0-3.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-65d6af6d87 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1266429] Review Request: cmark - CommonMark parsing and rendering
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266429 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- cmark-0.23.0-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-cac4f03fc2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1266429] Review Request: cmark - CommonMark parsing and rendering
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266429 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1266429] Review Request: cmark - CommonMark parsing and rendering
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266429 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 827723] Review Request: gnuhealth - The free Health and Hospital Information System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=827723 --- Comment #18 from Germano Massullo --- Any news? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1275009] Review Request: nodejs-chroma-js - JavaScript library for color conversions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1275009 --- Comment #3 from Piotr Popieluch --- Excuse me for the late response you can build with: BuildRequires: npm(grunt-cli) BuildRequires: npm(grunt-contrib-clean) BuildRequires: npm(grunt-contrib-coffee) BuildRequires: npm(grunt-replace) BuildRequires: npm(grunt-contrib-uglify) %build %nodejs_symlink_deps --build grunt Only thing is that dependency grunt-replace is not packaged yet. You will have to package that one first (or just use sed to set the version in chroma.js, and patch out grunt-replace out of the Gruntfile.js). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302552] Review Request: php-zendframework-zend-hydrator - Zend Framework Hydrator component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302552 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Alias|endframework/zend-hydrator |zendframework/zend-hydrator -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1302552] Review Request: php-zendframework-zend-hydrator - Zend Framework Hydrator component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302552 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||endframework/zend-hydrator -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1282903] Review Request: oci-register-machine - Golang binary for registering OCI containers with systemd-machined
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282903
--- Comment #12 from Jan Chaloupka ---
Makefile contains 'go get' command:
go get github.com/cpuguy83/go-md2man
It is against packaging policies. It must by patched in the package. The
project is already built in the distribution as
golang-github-cpuguy83-go-md2man package. It provides go-md2man binary, so
"Requires: go-md2man" will install the package.
At the same time if you use Makefile
- the package can not be built with debug info support
- the package can be built only for architectures with golang compiler, no with
gcc-go
unless you patch the Makefile. Would recommend to move content of Makefile into
the spec instead of running make. However, not blocker for the review.
If possible, create Godeps.json file for the project with commit of
github.com/godbus/dbus used. I.e.
{
"ImportPath": "github.com/coreos/etcd",
"GoVersion": "go1.5.1",
"Packages": [
"./..."
],
"Deps": [
{
"ImportPath": "github.com/godbus/dbus",
"Rev": "COMMIT"
}
]
}
so we can validate the dependency is provided by the distribution and
up-to-date.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1282903] Review Request: oci-register-machine - Golang binary for registering OCI containers with systemd-machined
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282903 Jan Chaloupka changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |golang-github-projectatomic |oci-register-machine - |-oci-register-machine - |Golang binary for |Golang binary for |registering OCI containers |registering OCI containers |with systemd-machined |with systemd-machined | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1282903] Review Request: golang-github-projectatomic-oci-register-machine - Golang binary for registering OCI containers with systemd-machined
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282903 Jan Chaloupka changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |golang-github-sallyom-Regis |golang-github-projectatomic |ter - Golang binary for |-oci-register-machine - |registering OCI containers |Golang binary for |with systemd-machined |registering OCI containers ||with systemd-machined -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1293735] Review Request: boomaga - A virtual printer for viewing a document before printing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1293735
--- Comment #18 from MartinKG ---
Dmitry thanks for your helpfulness and Explanation.
here is the new rpm package:
Spec URL: https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/boomaga.spec
SRPM URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/boomaga-0.7.1-5.git2928eef.fc23.src.rpm
%changelog
* Thu Jan 28 2016 Martin Gansser -
0.7.1-5.git2928eef
- Dropped link for %%{_bindir}/boomagamerger
- Added %%{name}-0.7.1-NONGUI_DIR.patch
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
