[Bug 1303649] Review Request: perl-Tie-Sub - Tying a subroutine, function or method to a hash
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303649 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova --- Source file is ok Summary is ok License is ok Description is ok URL and Source0 are ok All tests passed BuildRequires are ok $ rpm -qp --requires perl-Tie-Sub-1.001-1.fc24.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1) 1 perl(Carp) 1 perl(Params::Validate) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -qp --provides perl-Tie-Sub-1.001-1.fc24.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Tie::Sub) = 1.001 1 perl-Tie-Sub = 1.001-1.fc24 Binary provides are Ok. $ rpmlint ./perl-Tie-Sub* 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint is ok The package looks good. Approved -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1265628] Review Request: dhcpcd - A minimalistic network configuration daemon with DHCP and rdisc support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1265628 --- Comment #30 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- pavlix's scratch build of dhcpcd-6.10.1-1.fc24.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12784529 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 804125] Review Request: rdkit - A toolkit for cheminformatics and machine learning
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804125 Gianluca Sforna changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|i...@cicku.me |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flags|needinfo?(i...@cicku.me) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1265628] Review Request: dhcpcd - A minimalistic network configuration daemon with DHCP and rdisc support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1265628 --- Comment #31 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- pavlix's scratch build of dhcpcd-6.10.1-1.fc24.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12784685 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1303866] New: Review Request: lz4-java - LZ4 compression for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303866 Bug ID: 1303866 Summary: Review Request: lz4-java - LZ4 compression for Java Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: tre...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/lz4-java.spec SRPM URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/lz4-java-1.3.0-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Provides access to two compression methods that both generate a valid LZ4 stream. First one is fast scan (LZ4) which has low memory footprint (~ 16 KB). It is very fast (fast scan with skipping heuristics in case the input looks in-compressible). The method also has a reasonable compression ratio (depending on the redundancy of the input). Second one is high compression (LZ4 HC) with medium memory footprint (~ 256 KB).It is rather slow (~ 10 times slower than LZ4). The method has a good compression ratio (depending on the size and the redundancy of the input). The streams produced by those two compression algorithms use the same compression format, are very fast to decompress and can be decompressed by the same decompressor instance. Fedora Account System Username: trepik -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1303866] Review Request: lz4-java - LZ4 compression for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303866 Tomas Repik changed: What|Removed |Added Version|rawhide |23 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 1301116] Review Request: libcxl - Coherent accelerator interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301116 --- Comment #7 from Michel Normand --- (In reply to Sinny Kumari from comment #6) I accepted all you comments and updated the spec. * adding BuildRequires: gcc * removed ldconfig ... in %install * remove %defattr in %file devel * remove LICENSE in %file devel * remove static lib Spec URL: https://michelmno.fedorapeople.org/libcxl.spec SRPM URL: https://michelmno.fedorapeople.org/libcxl-1.3-1.fc23.src.rpm related scratch build on ppc koji: http://ppc.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3115696 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 #22 from Nalin Dahyabhai --- Looks good, though the -devel package contains sources in package "main". My guess is that you wanted to leave with_devel set to 0 all the time. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 Nalin Dahyabhai 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 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com --- Comment #24 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Hi Taylor, Would it be possible to make an initial build at least? The review was approved, so pushing to SCM and making a build shouldn't take more than 5 minutes. I could help co-maintain the package if you'd like - I'm sure I can help with normal updates and things :) Cheers! Ankur -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1246792] Review Request: ndctl - Manage "libnvdimm" subsystem devices (Non-volatile Memory)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246792 --- Comment #20 from David Woodhouse --- Once upon a time, ISTR github generated non-reproducible tarballs (timestamps differed, or something stupid). Is that now fixed? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 #23 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- runcom's scratch build of skopeo-0.1.4-1.fc23.src.rpm for f23 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12786664 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 #24 from Antonio Murdaca --- Updated everything and it should be good to go: Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/runcom/fedora-pkgs/master/skopeo/fedora/skopeo/skopeo.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/runcom/fedora-pkgs/raw/master/skopeo/fedora/skopeo/skopeo-0.1.4-1.fc23.src.rpm Koji builds: - f23: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12786664 - rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12786653 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 #25 from Nalin Dahyabhai --- Yup, looks good from here. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1277478] Review Request: php-nette-deprecated - APIs and features removed from Nette Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1277478 Shawn Iwinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||sh...@iwin.ski Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sh...@iwin.ski 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 1277478] Review Request: php-nette-deprecated - APIs and features removed from Nette Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1277478 --- Comment #2 from Shawn Iwinski --- Created attachment 1120405 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1120405&action=edit phpcompatinfo-full.log phpCompatInfo version 5.0.0 DB built Jan 09 2016 15:36:21 CET -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1277478] Review Request: php-nette-deprecated - APIs and features removed from Nette Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1277478 --- Comment #3 from Shawn Iwinski --- Created attachment 1120406 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1120406&action=edit phpcompatinfo-lib.log phpCompatInfo version 5.0.0 DB built Jan 09 2016 15:36:21 CET -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1277478] Review Request: php-nette-deprecated - APIs and features removed from Nette Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1277478 --- Comment #4 from Shawn Iwinski --- Created attachment 1120407 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1120407&action=edit fedora-review.txt Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1277478 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, PHP, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1277478] Review Request: php-nette-deprecated - APIs and features removed from Nette Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1277478
Shawn Iwinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Shawn Iwinski ---
[!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[!]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
Note: %defattr present but not needed
[!]: Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
[!]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: %clean present but not required
As usual, remove EPEL 5 bits after initial import
No blockers.
= APPROVED =
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300698] Review Request: perl-Fuse - Write filesystems in Perl using FUSE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300698 --- Comment #3 from Jitka Plesnikova --- Updated Spec URL: https://jplesnik.fedorapeople.org/perl-Fuse/perl-Fuse.spec SRPM URL: https://jplesnik.fedorapeople.org/perl-Fuse/perl-Fuse-0.16.1-2.fc24.src.rpm I asked upstream about the license, but I don't get any answer yet. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1303569] Review Request: uflash - An utility to flash Python onto the BBC micro:bit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303569 --- Comment #2 from kushal...@gmail.com --- I have the updated srpm with proper file permissions. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1303569] Review Request: uflash - An utility to flash Python onto the BBC micro:bit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303569 Praveen Kumar changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Praveen Kumar --- Yes, rpmlint is not showing this warning now and source checksum also correct. Rpmlint --- Checking: uflash-0.9.18b0-1.fc23.noarch.rpm uflash-0.9.18b0-1.fc23.src.rpm uflash.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time, run-time, rudiment uflash.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US programatically -> grammatically, problematically, pragmatically uflash.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary uflash uflash.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time, run-time, rudiment uflash.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US programatically -> grammatically, problematically, pragmatically 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Source checksums https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/u/uflash/uflash-0.9.18b0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 876e427812530a14a1b662213343aca2c65e58b7e9bcf6d1625f0f1c317b6e1a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 876e427812530a14a1b662213343aca2c65e58b7e9bcf6d1625f0f1c317b6e1a Approved == -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300092] Review Request: python-socketIO-client - A socket.io client library for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300092 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-socketIO-client -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1303434] Review Request: erlang-p1_sip - ProcessOne SIP server component in Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303434 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/erlang-p1_sip -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301286] Review Request: firejail - A SUID sandbox program
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301286
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppi...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ---
The firejail package must own %{_datadir}/bash-completion directory because it
install files there and the directory is not owned by any dependency.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1298251] Review Request: shrinkpdf - Simple wrapper around Ghostscript to shrink PDFs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298251 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ppi...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301286] Review Request: firejail - A SUID sandbox program
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301286 --- Comment #2 from Jamie Nguyen --- Thanks Petr. Spec URL: https://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/firejail/firejail.spec SRPM URL: https://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/firejail/firejail-0.9.36-2.fc23.src.rpm * Tue Feb 02 2016 Jamie Nguyen - 0.9.36-2 - own bash-completion directory - fix libdir in disable-devel.inc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1298251] Review Request: shrinkpdf - Simple wrapper around Ghostscript to shrink PDFs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298251 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar --- URL and Source0 links are usable. Ok. Source is original (SHA-256: d68561bd674847d6b73961af571adf5720c9b525720afc399c3f7324d7af638f). Ok. The summary is Ok. TODO: I would improve the description a little bit. I would spell "filesize" as two words "file size". I think the second sentence "Inspired by some code found in an OpenOffice Python script (I think)" is irrelevant and I would remove it. Also I think "72dpi" is spelled wrongly. I'd write it as "72 DPI". License verified from shrinkpdf.sh. Ok. No compiled code. noarch BuildArch is Ok. FIX: Run-require "coreutils" because the script executes "cp", "wc", and "cut" programs. FIX: Build-require "coreutils" (shrinkpdf.spec:30). $ rpmlint shrinkpdf.spec ../SRPMS/shrinkpdf-0-1.fc24.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/shrinkpdf-0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm shrinkpdf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filesize -> file size, file-size, fissile shrinkpdf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lossy -> loss, glossy, flossy shrinkpdf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recompression -> decompression, re compression, re-compression shrinkpdf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US downsampling -> down sampling, down-sampling, oversampling shrinkpdf.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filesize -> file size, file-size, fissile shrinkpdf.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lossy -> loss, glossy, flossy shrinkpdf.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recompression -> decompression, re compression, re-compression shrinkpdf.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US downsampling -> down sampling, down-sampling, oversampling shrinkpdf.noarch: W: no-documentation shrinkpdf.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary shrinkpdf 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings. FIX: Correct the "filesize" spelling. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/shrinkpdf-0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm -rwxr-xr-x1 rootroot 2979 Feb 2 16:17 /usr/bin/shrinkpdf File permission and layout is Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/shrinkpdf-0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 /bin/sh 1 ghostscript-core 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 FIX: Run-require "coreutils". $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/shrinkpdf-0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 shrinkpdf = 0-1.fc24 Binary provides are Ok. $ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/noarch/shrinkpdf-0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. Package builds in F24 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12788562). Ok. Otherwise the package is in line with Fedora packaging guidelines. Please correct all `FIX' items, consider fixing `TODO' items, and provide a new spec file. Resolution: Package NOT approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301143] Review Request: skopeo - Get information about Docker images without pulling them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 Nalin Dahyabhai 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 1282903] Review Request: oci-register-machine - Golang binary for registering OCI containers with systemd-machined
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282903 Nalin Dahyabhai 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 1273579] Review Request: nest - The neural simulation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273579 --- Comment #15 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Pull request with cmake build system: https://github.com/nest/nest-simulator/pull/213 I suggest we hold off until this is merged? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304040] New: Review Request: docker-anaconda-addon -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304040 Bug ID: 1304040 Summary: Review Request: docker-anaconda-addon - Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: b...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/docker-anaconda-addon/docker-anaconda-addon-0.1-1.fc24.src.rpm SRPM URL: https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/docker-anaconda-addon/docker-anaconda-addon-0.1-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Add a kickstart addon section to Anaconda, com_redhat_docker, to run Docker on the newly installed system during the installation process. Fedora Account System Username: bcl -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304040] Review Request: docker-anaconda-addon - Anaconda kickstart support for Docker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304040 Brian Lane changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |docker-anaconda-addon - |docker-anaconda-addon - ||Anaconda kickstart support ||for Docker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300070] Review Request: octave-doctest - Documentation tests for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300070 --- Comment #22 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- sagitter's scratch build of octave-doctest-0.4.1-2.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12790193 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304052] New: Review Request: python-sphinx-argparse - Automatic Sphinx documentation for argparse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304052 Bug ID: 1304052 Summary: Review Request: python-sphinx-argparse - Automatic Sphinx documentation for argparse Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: b...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinx-argparse/python-sphinx-argparse.spec SRPM URL: https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinx-argparse/python-sphinx-argparse-0.1.15-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Sphinx extension that automatically documents argparse commands and options Fedora Account System Username: bcl -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300070] Review Request: octave-doctest - Documentation tests for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300070
--- Comment #23 from Antonio Trande ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
- '%global __provides_exclude_from ^%{octpkglibdir}/.*\\.oct$' is
missing
- Validation of metainfo.xml file is not need.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData#app-data-validate_usage
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
[!]: 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.
[-]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[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
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[-]: 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]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{b
[Bug 1303866] Review Request: lz4-java - LZ4 compression for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303866 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo --- Hi. This bug is a duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270317 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 Jason Tibbitts 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 1303764] Review Request: xchange - Java library providing API for Bitcoin and Altcoin exchanges
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303764 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo --- (In reply to Jonny Heggheim from comment #1) > Some of the exchanges/modules have been disables because of missing > transitive dependencies. These might be enabled later. if you want use, are available @ : https://gil.fedorapeople.org/socketio-client-java-0.4.1-1.fc22.src.rpm https://gil.fedorapeople.org/quickfixj-1.6.1-1.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 1303764] Review Request: xchange - Java library providing API for Bitcoin and Altcoin exchanges
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303764 --- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo --- ... and http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/glassfish-websocket-api.git/ aka mvn(javax.websocket:javax.websocket-client-api) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1303764] Review Request: xchange - Java library providing API for Bitcoin and Altcoin exchanges
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303764 --- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo --- ... and http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/tyrus.git provides tyrus-container-grizzly-client (mvn(org.glassfish.tyrus:tyrus-container-grizzly-client)) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301260] Review Request: python-responses - An utility library for mocking out the requests Python library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301260 Bug 1301260 depends on bug 1297704, which changed state. Bug 1297704 Summary: Review Request: python-cookies - Friendlier RFC 6265-compliant cookie parser/renderer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297704 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 1301395] Review Request: perl-Sort-MergeSort - Merge pre-sorted input streams
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301395 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Sort-MergeSort-0.31-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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 1301395] Review Request: perl-Sort-MergeSort - Merge pre-sorted input streams
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301395 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-02-02 14:19:50 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301285] Review Request: perl-Mock-Sub - Mock package, object and standard subroutines, with unit testing in mind
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301285 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Mock-Sub-1.06-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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 1297704] Review Request: python-cookies - Friendlier RFC 6265-compliant cookie parser/renderer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297704 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-02-02 14:19:38 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1297704] Review Request: python-cookies - Friendlier RFC 6265-compliant cookie parser/renderer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297704 --- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System --- python-cookies-2.2.1-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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 1301284] Review Request: perl-File-Tempdir - Object interface for File::Temp module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301284 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-02-02 14:20:02 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301285] Review Request: perl-Mock-Sub - Mock package, object and standard subroutines, with unit testing in mind
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301285 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-02-02 14:19:55 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1285518] Review Request: perl-File-Edit-Portable - Read and write files while keeping the original line-endings intact
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285518 Bug 1285518 depends on bug 1301284, which changed state. Bug 1301284 Summary: Review Request: perl-File-Tempdir - Object interface for File::Temp module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301284 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 1285518] Review Request: perl-File-Edit-Portable - Read and write files while keeping the original line-endings intact
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285518 Bug 1285518 depends on bug 1301285, which changed state. Bug 1301285 Summary: Review Request: perl-Mock-Sub - Mock package, object and standard subroutines, with unit testing in mind https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301285 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 1301284] Review Request: perl-File-Tempdir - Object interface for File::Temp module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301284 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- perl-File-Tempdir-0.02-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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 1295209] Review Request: lua-fun - functional programming library for Lua and LuaJIT
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295209 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- lua-fun-0.1.3-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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 1294278] Review Request: python-usbtmc - Python implementation of the USBTMC protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294278 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- python-usbtmc-0.7-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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 1294278] Review Request: python-usbtmc - Python implementation of the USBTMC protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294278 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-02-02 14:21:35 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 505154] Tracker: Review Requests for Science and Technology related packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505154 Bug 505154 depends on bug 1294278, which changed state. Bug 1294278 Summary: Review Request: python-usbtmc - Python implementation of the USBTMC protocol https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294278 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- 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 1295209] Review Request: lua-fun - functional programming library for Lua and LuaJIT
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295209 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-02-02 14:22:03 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1229903] Review Request: NetworkManager-sstp - NetworkManager VPN plugin for SSTP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1229903 --- Comment #6 from Göran Uddeborg --- This seems to have fallen asleep. Do you still have the ambition to package NetworkManager-sstp for Fedora? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301589] Review Request: super-csv - A fast, programmer-friendly, free CSV library for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301589 --- Comment #12 from Pavel Alexeev --- Aha! Good. For now only last issue with unowned directories still present. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1264712] Review Request: dub - The D package manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264712 Raphael Groner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1264712] Review Request: dub - The D package manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264712 Raphael Groner changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|projects...@smart.ms|nob...@fedoraproject.org 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 1298251] Review Request: shrinkpdf - Simple wrapper around Ghostscript to shrink PDFs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298251 --- Comment #3 from Raphael Groner --- Hi Petr, thanks for your hints. I do not see any blockers. Please approve the package. Spelling errors They do not harm with packaging in general, therefore marked as warnings. coreutils That package can be assumed to be installed in every working system. Otherwise, we would have to add iit as dependency to every other packages as well. It's always present in a fresh mock build environment and so also on koji. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304052] Review Request: python-sphinx-argparse - Automatic Sphinx documentation for argparse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304052 David Shea changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ds...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ds...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1288643] Review Request: dlib - A modern C++ toolkit containing machine learning algorithms
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288643 Dmitry Mikhirev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2016-02-02 16:10:13 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about 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 Dmitry Mikhirev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2016-02-02 16:10:42 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1289760] Review Request: drawtk - A C library to perform efficient 3D drawings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289760 Dmitry Mikhirev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2016-02-02 16:11:09 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1288651] Review Request: openigtlink - Implementation of the OpenIGTLink network communication protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288651 Dmitry Mikhirev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2016-02-02 16:10:57 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304097] New: Review Request: ctk - the Common Toolkit for biomedical imaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304097 Bug ID: 1304097 Summary: Review Request: ctk - the Common Toolkit for biomedical imaging Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mikhi...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/bizdelnick/neuro/ctk.git/plain/ctk.spec?id=0cbf527233d2d4534f49ad8befb8da7ec83f2a06 SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bizdelnick/neuro/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00157576-ctk/ctk-0.1-0.1.20151015gitbdc8cac.fc24.src.rpm Description: The Common Toolkit is a community effort to provide support code for medical image analysis, surgical navigation, and related projects. Fedora Account System Username: bizdelnick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304097] Review Request: ctk - the Common Toolkit for biomedical imaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304097 Dmitry Mikhirev changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1276941 (fedora-neuro) Alias||ctk Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276941 [Bug 1276941] Fedora NeuroImaging and NeuroScience tracking bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304097] Review Request: ctk - the Common Toolkit for biomedical imaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304097 Dmitry Mikhirev changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1276941 (fedora-neuro) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276941 [Bug 1276941] Fedora NeuroImaging and NeuroScience tracking bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301589] Review Request: super-csv - A fast, programmer-friendly, free CSV library for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301589 --- Comment #13 from gil cattaneo --- Created attachment 1120559 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1120559&action=edit files.dir What directories? This is the content of the gilr file.dir generated using fedora-review -b 1301589 --plugins Java -m fedora-23-i386 : super-csv = /usr/share/doc/super-csv /usr/share/java/super-csv /usr/share/licenses/super-csv /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv /usr/share/doc/super-csv/README.md /usr/share/java/super-csv/super-csv.jar /usr/share/licenses/super-csv/LICENSE.txt /usr/share/maven-metadata/super-csv-super-csv.xml /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv/super-csv.pom super-csv-dozer === /usr/share/java/super-csv /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv /usr/share/java/super-csv/super-csv-dozer.jar /usr/share/maven-metadata/super-csv-super-csv-dozer.xml /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv/super-csv-dozer.pom super-csv-java8 === /usr/share/java/super-csv /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv /usr/share/java/super-csv/super-csv-java8.jar /usr/share/maven-metadata/super-csv-super-csv-java8.xml /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv/super-csv-java8.pom super-csv-joda == /usr/share/java/super-csv /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv /usr/share/java/super-csv/super-csv-joda.jar /usr/share/maven-metadata/super-csv-super-csv-joda.xml /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv/super-csv-joda.pom super-csv-parent /usr/share/licenses/super-csv-parent /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv /usr/share/licenses/super-csv-parent/LICENSE.txt /usr/share/maven-metadata/super-csv-super-csv-parent.xml /usr/share/maven-poms/super-csv/super-csv-parent.pom super-csv-javadoc = /usr/share/javadoc/super-csv -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1268716] Review Request: cjdns - IP6 VPN with crypto address allocation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716 --- Comment #17 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- sdgathman's scratch build of cjdns-17.3-2.fc22.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12792206 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304097] Review Request: ctk - the Common Toolkit for biomedical imaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304097 Dmitry Mikhirev changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1276941 (fedora-neuro) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276941 [Bug 1276941] Fedora NeuroImaging and NeuroScience tracking bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1268716] Review Request: cjdns - IP6 VPN with crypto address allocation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716 --- Comment #18 from Stuart D Gathman --- The 17.3-2 build works fine on f23 for i686 and x86_64. There seems to be some compiler changes for rawhide. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304052] Review Request: python-sphinx-argparse - Automatic Sphinx documentation for argparse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304052
--- Comment #1 from David Shea ---
Two things:
Easy:
In each %description, s/document/documents/. Summary is correct.
Less easy:
There are tests, but they're not hooked up to setup.py, so %check doesn't do
anything. Adding pytest and running py.test seems to work fine. Adding
python3-pytest and running py.test-3 works less fine, since apparently
test_parser depends on a hardcoded value for argv[0]. The quick and dirty
solution of replacing the four py.test instances in test_parser.py with
os.path.basename(sys.argv[0]) seems to work but I haven't thought real hard
about how that might break something else, so I don't know how you want to
handle that.
All the other stuff from fedora-review looks fine. Here it is!
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 8 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/dshea/1304052-python-sphinx-argparse/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[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.
[-]: 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2
-sphinx-
[Bug 1229903] Review Request: NetworkManager-sstp - NetworkManager VPN plugin for SSTP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1229903 --- Comment #7 from Marcin Zajaczkowski --- Thanks Goran for the reminder. And big thanks Christopher for the review! This weekend I will be at DevConf.cz and (drawing from the vibe) will try to move it forward. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304107] New: Review Request: nodejs-sequencify - A module for sequencing tasks and dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304107 Bug ID: 1304107 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-sequencify - A module for sequencing tasks and dependencies Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-sequencify/nodejs-sequencify.spec SRPM URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-sequencify/nodejs-sequencify-0.0.7-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: A module for sequencing tasks and dependencies Fedora Account System Username: jsmith -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304107] Review Request: nodejs-sequencify - A module for sequencing tasks and dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304107 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||956806 (nodejs-reviews) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806 [Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300092] Review Request: python-socketIO-client - A socket.io client library for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300092 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 1300092] Review Request: python-socketIO-client - A socket.io client library for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300092 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- python-socketIO-client-0.6.5-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-442278716c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304110] Review Request: nodejs-stream-consume - Consume a stream to ensure it keeps flowing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304110 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||956806 (nodejs-reviews) Summary|Review Request: -|nodejs-stream-consume - |Consume a stream to ensure |Consume a stream to ensure |it keeps flowing|it keeps flowing Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806 [Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304110] New: Review Request: - Consume a stream to ensure it keeps flowing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304110 Bug ID: 1304110 Summary: Review Request: - Consume a stream to ensure it keeps flowing Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-stream-consume/nodejs-stream-consume.spec SRPM URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-stream-consume/nodejs-stream-consume-0.1.0-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Consume a stream to ensure it keeps flowing Fedora Account System Username: jsmith -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300219] Review Request: python-ripe-atlas-cousteau - Python wrapper for RIPE Atlas API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300219 Bug 1300219 depends on bug 1300092, which changed state. Bug 1300092 Summary: Review Request: python-socketIO-client - A socket.io client library for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300092 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1300092] Review Request: python-socketIO-client - A socket.io client library for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300092 Jan Včelák changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2016-02-02 17:17:25 --- Comment #12 from Jan Včelák --- Thank you, guys! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304107] Review Request: nodejs-sequencify - A module for sequencing tasks and dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304107 Tom Hughes changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||t...@compton.nu Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|t...@compton.nu 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 1304107] Review Request: nodejs-sequencify - A module for sequencing tasks and dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304107
Tom Hughes changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Tom Hughes ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/tom/1304107
-nodejs-sequencify/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: 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
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[-]: 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).
[?]: 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]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is ru
[Bug 1304110] Review Request: nodejs-stream-consume - Consume a stream to ensure it keeps flowing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304110 Tom Hughes changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||t...@compton.nu Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|t...@compton.nu 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 1304110] Review Request: nodejs-stream-consume - Consume a stream to ensure it keeps flowing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304110 --- Comment #1 from Tom Hughes --- This is missing a BR on should for the tests. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304110] Review Request: nodejs-stream-consume - Consume a stream to ensure it keeps flowing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304110 --- Comment #2 from Tom Hughes --- through2 as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1268716] Review Request: cjdns - IP6 VPN with crypto address allocation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716 --- Comment #19 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- sdgathman's scratch build of cjdns-17.3-2.fc22.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12792872 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301260] Review Request: python-responses - An utility library for mocking out the requests Python library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301260 --- Comment #15 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- germano's scratch build of python-responses-0.5.1-1.fc23.src.rpm for f23 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12792870 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304052] Review Request: python-sphinx-argparse - Automatic Sphinx documentation for argparse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304052 --- Comment #2 from Brian Lane --- Spec URL: https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinx-argparse/python-sphinx-argparse.spec SRPM URL: https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinx-argparse/python-sphinx-argparse-0.1.15-2.fc24.src.rpm Upstream actually uses tox to test things, but that installs in a virtualenv so I don't think it's suitable for a %check. I'm just going to drop that part instead of trying to mangle the code into shape. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1268716] Review Request: cjdns - IP6 VPN with crypto address allocation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716 --- Comment #20 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- sdgathman's scratch build of cjdns-17.3-2.fc22.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12792947 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1294862] Review Request: python3-nose - Discovery-based unittest extension for Python 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294862 --- Comment #3 from Orion Poplawski --- * Tue Feb 2 2016 Orion Poplawski - 1.3.7-2 - Fix URL - Fix long line in description - Include more documentation No need to BR coreutils, that is expected in the buildroot. Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-nose.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-nose-1.3.7-2.el7.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 1294872] Review Request: python-backports_abc - A backport of recent additions to the 'collections.abc' module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294872 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Orion Poplawski --- * Tue Feb 2 2016 Orion Poplawski - 0.4-2 - Fix python3 package file ownership Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-backports_abc.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-backports_abc-0.4-2.fc23.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 1299580] Review Request: python-grafyaml - Tools to make Grafana dashboards from templates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299580
Haïkel Guémar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Haïkel Guémar ---
Small fix required before import, doc subpackage can be installed without its
license file.
Please add it.
I hereby approve this package into Fedora Packages Collection, please submit a
SCM request in PkgDB.
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: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache
(v2.0)". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck
in /home/haikel/1299580-python-grafyaml/licensecheck.txt
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.5
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.5/site-
packages, /usr/lib/python3.5
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 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 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{vers
[Bug 1294862] Review Request: python3-nose - Discovery-based unittest extension for Python 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294862 Denis Fateyev changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Denis Fateyev --- (In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #3) > No need to BR coreutils, that is expected in the buildroot. There is a tendency nowadays to add everything to BRs, since according the recent changes the exception list is gone. Although I'm not insisting in this case. The package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1294862] Review Request: python3-nose - Discovery-based unittest extension for Python 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294862 --- Comment #5 from Orion Poplawski --- BuildRequires It is important that your package list all necessary build dependencies using the BuildRequires?: tag. You may assume that enough of an environment exists for RPM to function and execute basic shell scripts, but you should not assume any other packages are present as RPM dependencies and anything brought into the buildroot by the build system may change over time. It's pretty clear that mv/cp/etc falls under that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1304125] New: Review Request: pam_usb - hardware authentication for Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304125 Bug ID: 1304125 Summary: Review Request: pam_usb - hardware authentication for Linux Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: t...@gpul.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://gattaca.es/files/packages/pam_usb.spec SRPM URL: http://gattaca.es/files/packages/pam_usb-0.5.0-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: pam_usb provides hardware authentication for Linux using ordinary USB Flash Drives. It works with any application supporting PAM, such as su and login managers (GDM, KDM). Fedora Account System Username: tsao This is my first package, and I need sponsor. That's the link to a sucessful koji buld: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12792709 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1301395] Review Request: perl-Sort-MergeSort - Merge pre-sorted input streams
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301395 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Sort-MergeSort-0.31-2.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
