[Bug 870189] Review Request: ibacm - InfiniBand Communication Manager Assistant

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870189

Honggang LI  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ho...@redhat.com



--- Comment #8 from Honggang LI  ---
Ping? Is this still a valid review request? It has been here about 4 years, and
seems nobody really care about this bug. Is it acceptable to open a new review
request bug for ibacm?

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 1315870] Review Request: libhfi1verbs - verbs userspace driver for Intel HFIs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315870

Honggang LI  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ho...@redhat.com
 Blocks||1315609



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about 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

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716



--- Comment #51 from Stuart D Gathman  ---
Added cjdns-online and cjdns-wait-online.service, more man pages.

Spec URL: http://gathman.org/linux/SPECS/cjdns.spec
SRPM URL: http://gathman.org/linux/f22/src/cjdns-17.3-8.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 1314506] Review Request: libbpg - A library of functions for manipulating BPG image format files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1314506

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tcall...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
x265 encoding is not acceptable for inclusion in Fedora at this time. I'm
fairly confident that BPG depends on x265 encoding, so this makes libbpg
unacceptable.

I realize this is disappointing, because this is an interesting new image
format.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315021] Review Request: openvibe - A software platform for brain-computer interfaces

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315021



--- Comment #9 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Please always link to the raw spec file for fedora-review's sake.

+ latest version
+ license is acceptable (AGPLv3)
+ license file is present, %license is used
+ scriptlets look OK
- provides/requires are not OK (see below)
+ builds and installs OK

No %check (apart from the desktop files and appdata) :(
Use appstream-util validate-relax --nonet, otherwise it fails in mock.

Installation fails with:
nothing provides libquat.so.07()(64bit) needed by openvibe-1.1.0-1.fc25.x86_64.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1311752] Review Request: vrpn -The Virtual Reality Peripheral Network

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1311752



--- Comment #12 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
OK, so it was mock misconfiguration, nss-myhostname was not enabled and
localhost was not resolvable. But it seems that vrpn has a buffer overflow if
the hostname cannot be resolved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1311752] Review Request: vrpn -The Virtual Reality Peripheral Network

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1311752



--- Comment #11 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
The tests fail now:
Start 2: test_vrpn

2: Test command:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/server_src/test_vrpn
2: Test timeout computed to be: 1500
2: vrpn_connect_udp_port: error finding host by name (localhost).
2: vrpn_Connection_IP: Can't Set up socket to lob UDP packets!
2: vrpn_connect_udp_port: error finding host by name (localhost).
2: vrpn_Connection_IP: Can't Set up socket to lob UDP packets!
2: vrpn_connect_udp_port: error finding host by name (localhost).
2: vrpn_Connection_IP: Can't Set up socket to lob UDP packets!
2: vrpn_connect_udp_port: error finding host by name (localhost).
2: vrpn_Connection_IP: Can't Set up socket to lob UDP packets!
2: *** buffer overflow detected ***:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/server_src/test_vrpn terminated
2: === Backtrace: =
2: /lib64/libc.so.6(+0x781f7)[0x7f1fe398c1f7]
2: /lib64/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x37)[0x7f1fe3a2f717]
2: /lib64/libc.so.6(+0x119740)[0x7f1fe3a2d740]
2: /lib64/libc.so.6(+0x11b687)[0x7f1fe3a2f687]
2:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/libvrpnserver.so.07(+0xd4d6d)[0x7f1fe58f3d6d]
2:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/libvrpnserver.so.07(_ZN16vrpn_Endpoint_IP8mainloopEP7timeval+0x345)[0x7f1fe58f7825]
2:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/libvrpnserver.so.07(_ZN18vrpn_Connection_IP8mainloopEPK7timeval+0x7f)[0x7f1fe58f876f]
2:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/libvrpnserver.so.07(_ZN19vrpn_Tracker_Remote8mainloopEv+0x25)[0x7f1fe591eeb5]
2:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/server_src/test_vrpn(main+0x97b)[0x561c91e0468b]
2: /lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf1)[0x7f1fe39340c1]
2:
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/server_src/test_vrpn(_start+0x29)[0x561c91e04a49]
2: === Memory map: 
2: 561c91e01000-561c91e07000 r-xp  fd:00 3136731   
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/server_src/test_vrpn
2: 561c92006000-561c92007000 r--p 5000 fd:00 3136731   
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/server_src/test_vrpn
2: 561c92007000-561c92008000 rw-p 6000 fd:00 3136731   
/builddir/build/BUILD/vrpn-version_07.33/build/server_src/test_vrpn
2: 561c929f4000-561c92b5a000 rw-p  00:00 0 
[heap]
2: 7f1fe1c0e000-7f1fe1c13000 r-xp  fd:00 3109199   
/usr/lib64/libnss_dns-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe1c13000-7f1fe1e13000 ---p 5000 fd:00 3109199   
/usr/lib64/libnss_dns-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe1e13000-7f1fe1e14000 r--p 5000 fd:00 3109199   
/usr/lib64/libnss_dns-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe1e14000-7f1fe1e15000 rw-p 6000 fd:00 3109199   
/usr/lib64/libnss_dns-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe1e15000-7f1fe1e2 r-xp  fd:00 3111673   
/usr/lib64/libnss_files-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe1e2-7f1fe201f000 ---p b000 fd:00 3111673   
/usr/lib64/libnss_files-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe201f000-7f1fe202 r--p a000 fd:00 3111673   
/usr/lib64/libnss_files-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe202-7f1fe2021000 rw-p b000 fd:00 3111673   
/usr/lib64/libnss_files-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe2021000-7f1fe2027000 rw-p  00:00 0 
2: 7f1fe2027000-7f1fe2028000 ---p  00:00 0 
2: 7f1fe2028000-7f1fe2828000 rw-p  00:00 0 
2: 7f1fe2828000-7f1fe282c000 r-xp  fd:00 3111911   
/usr/lib64/libattr.so.1.1.0
2: 7f1fe282c000-7f1fe2a2b000 ---p 4000 fd:00 3111911   
/usr/lib64/libattr.so.1.1.0
2: 7f1fe2a2b000-7f1fe2a2c000 r--p 3000 fd:00 3111911   
/usr/lib64/libattr.so.1.1.0
2: 7f1fe2a2c000-7f1fe2a2d000 rw-p  00:00 0 
2: 7f1fe2a2d000-7f1fe2a3 r-xp  fd:00 3109131   
/usr/lib64/libdl-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe2a3-7f1fe2c2f000 ---p 3000 fd:00 3109131   
/usr/lib64/libdl-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe2c2f000-7f1fe2c3 r--p 2000 fd:00 3109131   
/usr/lib64/libdl-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe2c3-7f1fe2c31000 rw-p 3000 fd:00 3109131   
/usr/lib64/libdl-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe2c31000-7f1fe2ca r-xp  fd:00 3109118   
/usr/lib64/libpcre.so.1.2.6
2: 7f1fe2ca-7f1fe2ea ---p 0006f000 fd:00 3109118   
/usr/lib64/libpcre.so.1.2.6
2: 7f1fe2ea-7f1fe2ea1000 r--p 0006f000 fd:00 3109118   
/usr/lib64/libpcre.so.1.2.6
2: 7f1fe2ea1000-7f1fe2ea2000 rw-p 0007 fd:00 3109118   
/usr/lib64/libpcre.so.1.2.6
2: 7f1fe2ea2000-7f1fe2eb9000 r-xp  fd:00 3111926   
/usr/lib64/libresolv-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe2eb9000-7f1fe30b9000 ---p 00017000 fd:00 3111926   
/usr/lib64/libresolv-2.23.90.so
2: 7f1fe30b9000-7f1fe30ba000 r--p 00017000 fd:00 3111926   

[Bug 1311752] Review Request: vrpn -The Virtual Reality Peripheral Network

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1311752



--- Comment #10 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
P, I'll try to use conjunctions that actually make sense

> This is not a packaging issue, but an upstream issue. But vrpn already has a  
> config file, so it should simply read whatever options it need itself. Having 
> a second config file is just a workaround for a stupid deficiency in the 
> server. If you need to provide configuration options on the command-line, a 
> systemd unit drop-in override is probably a better option.

This is not a packaging issue, but an upstream issue. Vrpn already has a 
config file, so it should simply read whatever options it need itself. Having a
second config file is just a workaround for a stupid deficiency in the server.
Nevertheless, if you need to provide configuration options on the command-line,
a systemd unit drop-in override is probably a better option. (Also, the name
/etc/default/something to *override* *defaults* is backwards ;))

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1311752] Review Request: vrpn -The Virtual Reality Peripheral Network

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1311752

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #9 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
> Seems that it was written to be started by hands but not by any init system. 
> But I think that systemd service is a good option anyway.
Yes, this service file is better than nothing. I'm just saying that this
is something that would be nice to fix in the long run.

> There are several settings that can be specified only as command line options
> (address to listen on etc.). That's why I prefer to allow setting these 
> options via file in /etc/default instead forcing users to use defaults.
This is not a packaging issue, but an upstream issue. But vrpn already has a
config file, so it should simply read whatever options it need itself. Having a
second config file is just a workaround for a stupid deficiency in the server.
If you need to provide configuration options on the command-line, a systemd
unit drop-in override is probably a better option.

But that somewhat matter of opinion, so I'll just get on with the review ;)

+ latest version
+ license is OK (GPLv3+)
- %license should be used for README.Legal
  README doesn't have to be packaged, since it just refers to README.Legal

- %python_provide macro should be used
[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#The_.25python_provide_macro]
+ provides/requires look OK otherwise
+ scriptlets look sane
+ builds and installs OK

Package is APPROVED. Please fix the license stuff and python provides.


You might consider defining %global _description to hold the repetead part of
description. One trick is to do something like this:
%global _description The Virtual... \
..\
  \
.
(I.e. wrap the text to 80 columns but then merge the first row with %global.)
This way you avoid an empty line in %description. I haven't found a nicer
way to do this.

You can also replace Requires*: systemd lines with %systemd_requires. FPC just
removed the ban a few days ago and it's more consise.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315910] Review Request: python-libarchive-c - Python interface to libarchive

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315910



--- Comment #1 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-libarchive-c.spec
SRPM URL:
http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-libarchive-c-2.2-2.fc25.src.rpm
rawhide koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13280996

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315912] New: Review Request: diffoscope - In-depth comparison of files, archives, and directories

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315912

Bug ID: 1315912
   Summary: Review Request: diffoscope - In-depth comparison of
files, archives, and directories
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: zbys...@in.waw.pl
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: dh...@openwall.com,
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Depends On: 1315910



Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/diffoscope.spec
SRPM URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/diffoscope-48-1.fc25.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: zbyszek
Description:
diffoscope will try to get to the bottom of what makes files or directories
different. It will recursively unpack archives of many kinds and transform
various binary formats into more human readable form to compare them. It can
compare two tarballs, ISO images, or PDF just as easily. The differences can
be shown in a text or HTML report.

diffoscope is developed as part of the "reproducible builds" Debian project and
was formerly known as "debbindiff".


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315910
[Bug 1315910] Review Request: python-libarchive-c - Python interface to
libarchive
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315910] Review Request: python-libarchive-c - Python interface to libarchive

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315910

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1315912




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315912
[Bug 1315912] Review Request: diffoscope - In-depth comparison of files,
archives, and directories
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315910] New: Review Request: python-libarchive-c - Python interface to libarchive

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315910

Bug ID: 1315910
   Summary: Review Request: python-libarchive-c - Python interface
to libarchive
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: zbys...@in.waw.pl
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/
SRPM URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/
Fedora Account System Username: zbyszek
Description:
The libarchive library provides a flexible interface for reading and writing
archives in various formats such as tar and cpio. libarchive also supports
reading and writing archives compressed using various compression filters such
as gzip and bzip2.

A Python interface to libarchive. It uses the standard ctypes module to
dynamically load and access the C library.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1250344] Review Request: python-networking-cisco - Cisco OpenStack Neutron driver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250344

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target Release|--- |Liberty
  Component|Package Review  |Package Review
Version|rawhide |Juno
Product|Fedora  |RDO
  Flags|fedora-review+ fedora-cvs+  |



-- 
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 1250344] Review Request: python-networking-cisco - Cisco OpenStack Neutron driver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250344

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed||2016-03-08 18:22:38



-- 
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 1250344] Review Request: python-networking-cisco - Cisco OpenStack Neutron driver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250344

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|1290163 |1243533
   |(RDO-MITAKA,RDO-MITAKA-REVI |(RDO-LIBERTY-REVIEWS)
   |EWS)|




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243533
[Bug 1243533] (RDO) Tracker: Review requests for new RDO Liberty packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290163
[Bug 1290163] Tracker: Blockers and Review requests for new RDO Mitaka
packages
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1250344] Review Request: python-networking-cisco - Cisco OpenStack Neutron driver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250344

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ape...@redhat.com
 Blocks||1290163
   ||(RDO-MITAKA,RDO-MITAKA-REVI
   ||EWS)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290163
[Bug 1290163] Tracker: Blockers and Review requests for new RDO Mitaka
packages
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1301063] Review Request: python-congressclient - OpenStack Congress client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301063

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ape...@redhat.com
 Blocks||1290163
   ||(RDO-MITAKA,RDO-MITAKA-REVI
   ||EWS)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290163
[Bug 1290163] Tracker: Blockers and Review requests for new RDO Mitaka
packages
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1310796] Review Request: python-etcd - a python client for etcd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310796

Matthew Barnes  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2016-03-08 17:41:09



-- 
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 1268716] Review Request: cjdns - IP6 VPN with crypto address allocation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716



--- Comment #50 from Stuart D Gathman  ---
For release 8, I added more man pages.  

TODO: 

Should I move the config to /etc/cjdns/cjdroute.conf ?  The issue is that a
server might run multiple instances of cjdns - each with its own config and
unique IP6.  Then the unit could support @ like openvpn.  Can there also be a
cjdns.service (without the @) that uses /etc/cjdroute.conf ?  Then this could
wait for a later release.

For services that listen on a cjdns IP, there needs to be a
cjdns-wait-online.service unit that functions like
NetworkManager-wait-online.service.  This can wait, but is needed to, for
instance, run thttpd on cjdns to provide nodeinfo.json.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1310796] Review Request: python-etcd - a python client for etcd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310796



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-etcd-0.4.3-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-cbd4c896de

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1310796] Review Request: python-etcd - a python client for etcd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310796

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315871] Review Request: python-mdp - Library for building data processing pipelines for machine learning

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315871



--- Comment #2 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
F23: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13279090
F24: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13279088
rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13279235

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315871] Review Request: python-mdp - Library for building data processing pipelines for machine learning

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315871

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW)  |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449
[Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter
response should be blocking this bug.
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315870] Review Request: libhfi1verbs - verbs userspace driver for Intel HFIs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315870

dennis.dalessan...@intel.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1273171



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 807867] Review Request: python-mdp - A modular toolkit for data processing in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807867

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl
 Resolution|CANTFIX |DUPLICATE



--- Comment #4 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1315871 ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315871] Review Request: python-mdp - Library for building data processing pipelines for machine learning

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315871

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW)
 CC||philip.worrall@googlemail.c
   ||om



--- Comment #1 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
*** Bug 807867 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449
[Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter
response should be blocking this bug.
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315871] Review Request: python-mdp - Library for building data processing pipelines for machine learning

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315871

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  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 1315871] New: Review Request: python-mdp - Library for building data processing pipelines for machine learning

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315871

Bug ID: 1315871
   Summary: Review Request: python-mdp - Library for building data
processing pipelines for machine learning
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: zbys...@in.waw.pl
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-mdp.spec
SRPM URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-mdp-3.5-1.fc25.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: zbyszek
Description:
The Modular toolkit for Data Processing (MDP) package is a library of
widely used data processing algorithms, and the possibility to combine
them together to form pipelines for building more complex data
processing software. MDP has been designed to be used as-is and as a
framework for scientific data processing development.

From the user’s perspective, MDP consists of a collection of units,
which process data. For example, these include algorithms for
supervised and unsupervised learning, principal and independent
components analysis and classification. These units can be chained
into data processing flows, to create pipelines as well as more
complex feed-forward network architectures. Given a set of input data,
MDP takes care of training and executing all nodes in the network in
the correct order and passing intermediate data between the
nodes. This allows the user to specify complex algorithms as a series
of simpler data processing steps.

--
This is an old package, but it still finds use in the community because
some of the algorithms are not implemented anywhere else. A new version
has just been released so I though it a good time to add this to 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 1315870] Review Request: libhfi1verbs - verbs userspace driver for Intel HFIs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315870

dennis.dalessan...@intel.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||john.fl...@intel.com
 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 1315870] New: Review Request: libhfi1verbs - verbs userspace driver for Intel HFIs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315870

Bug ID: 1315870
   Summary: Review Request: libhfi1verbs - verbs userspace driver
for Intel HFIs
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: dennis.dalessan...@intel.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://github.com/01org/opa-libhfi1verbs/releases/download/10_1/libhfi1verbs.spec
SRPM URL:
https://github.com/01org/opa-libhfi1verbs/releases/download/10_1/libhfi1verbs-0.5-16.fc23.src.rpm

Description: 
libhfi1verbs provides a device-specific userspace driver for Intel Host
Fabric interface cards.  This driver is designed for use with the
libibverbs library.

Fedora Account System Username: ddalessa

This is my first package submitted for Fedora and as such will be needing a
sponsor. I am the upstream maintainer for this package. Here is a link to to
the koji build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13277993

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315021] Review Request: openvibe - A software platform for brain-computer interfaces

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315021



--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Mikhirev  ---
Is not XML a good enough reason? Okay...

Spec URL:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/bizdelnick/neuro/openvibe.git/tree/openvibe.spec?id=d5c039183317e046b118cf503fe19b7dc52c68c0
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bizdelnick/neuro/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00166686-openvibe/openvibe-1.1.0-1.fc25.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 1246790] Review Request: mdp - Minimalist password safe

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790



--- Comment #28 from Rex Dieter  ---
1.  SHOULD: Naming Not OK, see comment #27 (and prior discussion)


2.  MUST: %%build NOT ok, builds with -O0 and generates build-time warning:
/usr/include/features.h:328:4: warning: #warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires
compiling with optimization (-O) [-Wcpp]
 #  warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires compiling with optimization (-O)


this is to due to configure flag: -debug, I'd recommend you remove that.  While
we're at it, '--prefix=%{_prefix}' is superfluous too.

3. SHOULD fix %%check, you do a 'pushd ...', but never do any 'popd' (please
add one)


license: ok

sources: ok
18a26b7c9ce4aef6e0e2658e4ed19977  mdp-0.7.4.tar.gz

scriptlets: n/a

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1290235] Review Request: bitlbee-facebook - Facebook protocol plugin for BitlBee

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290235



--- Comment #1 from Robert Scheck  ---
Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/bitlbee-facebook.spec
SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/bitlbee-facebook-1.0.0-1.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 1305390] Review Request: dreamchess-tools - DreamChess Tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305390

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter  ---
2. MUST add
BuildRequires: SDL_ttf-devel

otherwise,

naming: ok

license: ok

sources: ok
c46192e1b07fa437f9ba7467cde3956f 
dreamchess-tools-f8f32aa6fed41d82b4577dbce6f7eb106a9eb63e.tar.gz

3. scriptlets: NOT ok, remove needless icon scriptlets (package includes no
icons)

4.  SHOULD improve %description, really no idea what this package is for or
what it does.


APPROVED.  

(I'll leave the MUST FTBFS fix to you, since it won't build without it)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315193] Review Request (EPEL): cmake3 - Cross-platform make system

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315193

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



-- 
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 1305390] Review Request: dreamchess-tools - DreamChess Tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305390



--- Comment #1 from Rex Dieter  ---
1.  SHOULD replace multiline/complicated:

libtoolize --force
aclocal
autoheader
automake --force-missing --add-missing
autoconf


with:

autoreconf --force --install


2. FTBFS,
checking for SDL_ttf.h... no
configure: error: Cannot find
SDL_ttf header file

Hrm, trying to figure out what satisfies this (apparently not SDL2_ttf-devel)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1305382] Review Request: tristripper - Triangle stripification (algorithm by Tanguy Fautre)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305382

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu
  Flags||needinfo?(projects.rg@smart
   ||.ms)



--- Comment #15 from Rex Dieter  ---
This is needed by bug #1305390 , why delay in building it?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1305390] Review Request: dreamchess-tools - DreamChess Tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305390

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu
  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 1246790] Review Request: mdp - Minimalist password safe

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790



--- Comment #27 from Rex Dieter  ---
I'll echo other contributors to this review, and strongly suggest making an
effort to avoid any possible future conflicts by:
* avoid using just 'mdp' as package name
* avoid using 'mdp' as binary name

One good way to start that, would be to ask your upstream for alternatives.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315193] Review Request (EPEL): cmake3 - Cross-platform make system

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315193



--- Comment #14 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
Package is built for epel7, buildroot-override is tagged long enough to have it
available until it hits the release-repo.

Build for epel6 will be made as soon as we have jsoncpp in there.

-- 
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 1310873] Review Request: rubygem-async_sinatra - A Sinatra plugin for running on async webservers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310873

greg.helli...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
   |rubygem-async_sinatra - A   |rubygem-async_sinatra - A
   |Sinatra plugin to provide   |Sinatra plugin for running
   |convenience whilst  |on async webservers
   |performing asynchronous |
   |responses inside of the |
   |Sinatra framework running   |
   |under async webservers  |



--- Comment #6 from greg.helli...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Jerry James from comment #5)
> (In reply to greg.hellings from comment #4)
> > This appears to be the same problem as the other two reviews.
> 
> Yes, I wish I knew what is going on there.
> 
> > This was generated from the gem file. I've abbreviated it more 
> > appropriately.
> 
> That Summary is better, but now rpmlint complains:
> 
> rubygem-async_sinatra.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot C A Sinatra plugin
> for r
> unning on async webservers.
> 
> To make rpmlint happy, can we take the dot off the end?  Also, you will need
> to change the name of this bug to match the new summary prior to asking for
> package creation.

This is done.

> 
> > This text is provided by upstream. Is British/American spelling differences
> > an issue? I can alter it if American is expected.
> 
> See the 2nd paragraph of
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description

Updated.

> 
> > This is likely unnecessary, but the same as the other review. It is
> > informative for conveying information related to packaging the gem, but not
> > necessary important.
> 
> Okay, I will leave it up to you.

Removing this file, in order to simplify the whole process. Also should resolve
the issue with the dependencies.

There were additional files (in the examples set) that were also pulling in the
/usr/bin/env requirement. I've cleaned those up and the dependency is now
removed.

> 
> > There's no reason it shouldn't be executable, if we're leaving it in.
> 
> I'm going by the 3rd paragraph of
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation
> 
> "Files marked as documentation must not cause the package to pull in more
> dependencies than it would without the documentation. One simple way to
> ensure this in most cases is to remove all executable permissions from files
> in %_pkgdocdir."
> 
> In this case, a documentation file is adding a dependency on /usr/bin/env.
> 
> > I've moved the README.rdoc up to the main package and tagged it with
> > %license. But where is the processed CHANGELOG.rdoc? I'm happy to remove it
> > if you think it should be, but I've frequently seen those included as %doc
> > files.
> 
> The HTML version is in
> /usr/share/gems/doc/async_sinatra-1.2.1/rdoc/CHANGELOG_rdoc.html.  If you
> think the source version is also useful, I'm fine with that; just asking the
> question.

I've also removed this file, since there should be no need to include the
source file when a build result is available instead.

New files at
https://fedorapeople.org/~greghellings/rubygem-async_sinatra/rubygem-async_sinatra.spec
https://fedorapeople.org/~greghellings/rubygem-async_sinatra/rubygem-async_sinatra-1.2.1-3.fc24.src.rpm

--Greg

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1246790] Review Request: mdp - Minimalist password safe

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|FutureFeature   |
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu
  Flags||fedora-review?

Red Hat Bugzilla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|Enhancement |Bug 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 1315852] Review Request: gstreamermm1 - C++ wrapper for GStreamer library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315852

Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
   ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1312580



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315852] New: Review Request: gstreamermm1 - C++ wrapper for GStreamer library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315852

Bug ID: 1315852
   Summary: Review Request: gstreamermm1 - C++ wrapper for
GStreamer library
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: sanjay.an...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/gstreamermm1/gstreamermm1.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/gstreamermm1/gstreamermm1-1.4.3-1.fc25.src.rpm

Description: 
This package contains developer's documentation for the GStreamermm
library. Gstreamermm is the C++ API for the GStreamer library.

The documentation can be viewed either through the devhelp
documentation browser or through a web browser.


Fedora Account System Username: ankursinha

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1271768] Review Request: python-shade -- client library for operating OpenStack clouds

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271768

Paul Belanger  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2016-03-08 13:46:25



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1314865] Review Request: booth - Ticket Manager for Multi-site Clusters

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1314865



--- Comment #4 from Jan Pokorný  ---
First, thanks for the very in-depth review.
Really good points were raised, some will be discussed with upstream
for sure.


> TODO: Use plain commands instead of the macros (install instead of
> %{__install}).

Any particular justification (beside that in some instances,
command != %{__command} as some more flags are predefined)?

Was expecting the main purpose of having these macros predefined is to:
- avoid using shell builtins
- be independent on particular authoritative path of the binary/script
  (cf. /bin vs. /usr/bin)
- %{__command_flag} formatted macros signal it's desired to run them
  like these (cf. cp -a)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1282575] Review Request: pmix - Exascale version of PMI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282575

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Antonio Trande  ---
Package 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 1282575] Review Request: pmix - Exascale version of PMI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282575



--- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski  ---
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/pmix.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/pmix-1.1.3-1.el7.src.rpm

* Tue Mar 8 2016 Orion Poplawski  - 1.1.3-1
- Update to 1.1.3

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315801] Review Request: rubygem-nio4r - New IO for Ruby

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315801



--- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch  ---
* Use virtual rubygem provides
  - In you spec file, you are using "BuildRequires: rubygem-rspec", but this
would be nice to replace by "BuildRequires: rubygem(rspec)"

* Simlify %prep section
  - First of all, it is the best to do all the custom steps you need at the end 
of the %prep section. In that case, you are already in the right directory
and you can remove the pushd/popd stuff.
  - Secondly, I would suggest to move the rpmlint fixes to %install section.
In this specific case, they are harmless, but it might happen that
different
modification will cause troubles with gem rebuild done in %build section

* rpmlint fixes
  - I would suggest to delete the shebang ling instead of commenting it out. It
might be completely harmless, but I have the feeling that it might cause
some
issues (but I might be totall wrong as well ;))
  - It would be nice to report the fixes upstream. In case you have already
reported them, please provide link, so anybody can check next time what
is the status.

* Bundled library
  - It seems that this package bundles libev. Is there any chance to use the
system version of libev instead [1]? Or in the worst case provide the
"bundled" virtual provide.


Please resolve the issues prior we'll continue.


[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Bundling_and_Duplication_of_system_libraries

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315319] Review Request: perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler - Check for the presence of a compiler

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315319

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0
   ||.012-1.fc25



--- Comment #5 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315319] Review Request: perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler - Check for the presence of a compiler

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315319

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 1315319] Review Request: perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler - Check for the presence of a compiler

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315319



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.012-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-a7ffad0e85

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1305669] Review Request: rubygem-benchmark-ips - An iterations per second enhancement to Benchmark

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305669



--- Comment #5 from greg.helli...@gmail.com ---
Thanks for the 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 1305669] Review Request: rubygem-benchmark-ips - An iterations per second enhancement to Benchmark

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305669

greg.helli...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
   |rubygem-benchmark-ips - A   |rubygem-benchmark-ips - An
   |iterations per second   |iterations per second
   |enhancement to Benchmark|enhancement to Benchmark



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1310128] Review Request: zpaq - Incremental journaling back-up archiver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310128



--- Comment #7 from Petr Pisar  ---
Update package is on these addresses:

Spec URL: https://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/zpaq/zpaq.spec
SRPM URL: https://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/zpaq/zpaq-7.05-1.fc25.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 1310128] Review Request: zpaq - Incremental journaling back-up archiver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310128



--- Comment #6 from Petr Pisar  ---
(In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #4)
> but ldd will complain about another library:
> 
> $ ldd -u  libzpaq.so.0.1 
> Unused direct dependencies:
> /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1
> 
It was my fault. I typed something wrong. It actually works.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1310128] Review Request: zpaq - Incremental journaling back-up archiver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310128



--- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar  ---
There is an old discussion about it
 and the answer was
"requiring users to explicitly supply -lm is a bug" because "mathematical
functions are part of the standard library".

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1305154] Review Request: python-notario - A dictionary validator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305154

Ken Dreyer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1315816




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315816
[Bug 1315816] Review Request: python-pecan-notario - JSON validation for
Pecan with Notario
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315816] New: Review Request: python-pecan-notario - JSON validation for Pecan with Notario

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315816

Bug ID: 1315816
   Summary: Review Request: python-pecan-notario - JSON validation
for Pecan with Notario
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: ktdre...@ktdreyer.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-pecan-notario.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-pecan-notario-0.0.3-1.fc25.src.rpm
Description: Notario is flexible and succinct Python dictionary validator with
the ability to validate against both keys and values. Schemas are smaller and
readable representations of data being validated.
Fedora Account System Username: ktdreyer

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315816] Review Request: python-pecan-notario - JSON validation for Pecan with Notario

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315816

Ken Dreyer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1305154




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305154
[Bug 1305154] Review Request: python-notario - A  dictionary validator
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1310128] Review Request: zpaq - Incremental journaling back-up archiver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310128



--- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar  ---
rpmlint does not print the warning in my Fedora 25. Interesting.

It's true that the libm is listed as needed, but I as you can see, I do not
pass "-lm" to the compiler, so this looks like a bug in GCC. And if I pass
-Wl,--as-needed, the dependency on libm will disappear, but ldd will complain
about another library:

$ ldd -u  libzpaq.so.0.1 
Unused direct dependencies:
/lib64/libgcc_s.so.1

I will add the -Wl,--as-needed into LDFLAGS.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315809] Review Request: python-pylxd - python library for lxd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315809

Haïkel Guémar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1315805




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315805
[Bug 1315805] Review Request: python-requests-unixsocket - Use requests to
talk HTTP via a UNIX domain socket
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315805] Review Request: python-requests-unixsocket - Use requests to talk HTTP via a UNIX domain socket

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315805

Haïkel Guémar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1315809




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315809
[Bug 1315809] Review Request: python-pylxd - python library for lxd
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315809] New: Review Request: python-pylxd - python library for lxd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315809

Bug ID: 1315809
   Summary: Review Request: python-pylxd - python library for lxd
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: karlthe...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-pylxd.spec
SRPM URL:
https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-pylxd-2.0.0.0b2-1.fc23.src.rpm
Description: python library for lxd
Fedora Account System Username: hguemar

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315805] New: Review Request: python-requests-unixsocket - Use requests to talk HTTP via a UNIX domain socket

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315805

Bug ID: 1315805
   Summary: Review Request: python-requests-unixsocket - Use
requests to talk HTTP via a UNIX domain socket
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: karlthe...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-requests-unixsocket.spec
SRPM URL:
https://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-requests-unixsocket-0.1.5-1.fc23.src.rpm
Description: Use requests to talk HTTP via a UNIX domain socket
Fedora Account System Username: hguemar

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315805] Review Request: python-requests-unixsocket - Use requests to talk HTTP via a UNIX domain socket

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315805

Haïkel Guémar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1290163
   ||(RDO-MITAKA,RDO-MITAKA-REVI
   ||EWS)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290163
[Bug 1290163] Tracker: Blockers and Review requests for new RDO Mitaka
packages
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315801] Review Request: rubygem-nio4r - New IO for Ruby

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315801

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||vondr...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Vít Ondruch  ---
I'll take this for a 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 1315319] Review Request: perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler - Check for the presence of a compiler

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315319



--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315193] Review Request (EPEL): cmake3 - Cross-platform make system

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315193



--- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/cmake3

-- 
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 1298665] Review Request: libvma - Dramatically improves performance of socket based applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298665



--- Comment #23 from al...@mellanox.com ---
Thank you Neil for the pointer.

I will post the new spec and srpm as soon as they are ready.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315801] New: Review Request: rubygem-nio4r - New IO for Ruby

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315801

Bug ID: 1315801
   Summary: Review Request: rubygem-nio4r - New IO for Ruby
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jar...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/jaruga/git/rubygem-nio4r/rubygem-nio4r.spec
SRPM URL:
http://people.redhat.com/jaruga/git/rubygem-nio4r/rubygem-nio4r-1.2.1-1.fc25.src.rpm
Description: New IO for Ruby.
Fedora Account System Username: jaruga
Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13276362

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1298665] Review Request: libvma - Dramatically improves performance of socket based applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298665

Neil Horman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||avnerbh+mella...@gmail.com
  Flags||needinfo?(avnerbh+mellanox@
   ||gmail.com)



--- Comment #22 from Neil Horman  ---
Michal, thats a question for legal to answer.  Dual Licensing can mean any
number of things, including your interpretation, or others in which certain
files are licensed exclusively under a specific license (DPDK does this,
electing GPLv2 for some files, and BSD for others, and a proprietary license
for yet others).

Fedora typically treats a dual license scenario on a per-file basis (each file
selects which of the dual licenses applies to it).  Regardless, any non-open
source compatible license requires legal approval to be packaged and
distributed.

However, its a moot point, since Mellanox is being kind enough to fix the
packaging to be dual licensed BSD and GPLv2, which solves the problem for us,
as both of those are compatible.

alex, for your reference, here are the fedora license guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines

Should they help guide your conversion.  Thank you for taking the time to clear
this additional hurdle.  Please post a new spec and srpm here when you have one
available.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1283296] Review Request: pam-u2f - PAM authentication over U2F

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283296

Seth Jennings  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||sjenn...@redhat.com



--- Comment #19 from Seth Jennings  ---
Fred, the package is already in the repos.  The selinux issue is still
outstanding.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1305154] Review Request: python-notario - A dictionary validator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305154

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |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 1305154] Review Request: python-notario - A dictionary validator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305154



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-notario-0.0.11-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-7769ab249d

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315759] Review Request: restraint - Simple test harness which can be used with beaker

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315759



--- Comment #1 from Artem Savkov  ---
(In reply to Artem Savkov from comment #0)
> This is my first fedora package and I a sponsor. I am one of the upstream

s/I a sponsor/I 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 1315759] Review Request: restraint - Simple test harness which can be used with beaker

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315759

Artem Savkov  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 1315759] New: Review Request: restraint - Simple test harness which can be used with beaker

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315759

Bug ID: 1315759
   Summary: Review Request: restraint - Simple test harness which
can be used with beaker
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: asav...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://dump.trac3r.net/restraint.spec
SRPM URL: http://dump.trac3r.net/restraint-0.1.24-1.fc23.src.rpm
Description: Restraint harness which can run standalone or with beaker. When
provided a recipe XML it will execute each task listed in the recipe until
done.
Fedora Account System Username: asavkov
Rawhide koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13275093

This is my first fedora package and I a sponsor. I am one of the upstream
developers of restraint.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1159091] Review Request: openra - Libre/Free Real Time Strategy project [+Tracker to unbundle all dependencies]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1159091
Bug 1159091 depends on bug 1315057, which changed state.

Bug 1315057 Summary: restsharp: FTBFS in rawhide
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315057

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |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 1315020] Review Request: python-nmrglue - Python module for processing NMR data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315020



--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Underwood  ---
(Of course you'd need to use sitelib rather than sitearch in the above example,
but you get the idea).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1315020] Review Request: python-nmrglue - Python module for processing NMR data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315020

Jonathan Underwood  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Underwood  ---
Ok, this is looking great. I'm going to set it as passed review, but I'd urge
you to consider adding more tests during %check to check you can import other
modules than just the fileio modules. You can do simple checks just to see if
the module successfully imports. Eg. (taken from python-lz4.spec):

PYTHONPATH=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python2_sitearch} %{__python2} -c "import lz4"

These sorts of simple tests do actually catch breakage sometimes, so do have
use.

Thanks for your contribution to Fedora, and thanks for being so quick to
respond to the review.

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 1298665] Review Request: libvma - Dramatically improves performance of socket based applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298665



--- Comment #21 from al...@mellanox.com ---
Thank you Neil and Michal for the comments.

After intensive consulting we agreed to change libvma license: to GPLv2 or BSD
(dual license). 
I think that this change should resolve the discussed issue and any ambiguities
related to licensing.

We are going to release a new libvma version with this change.
As soon as the new version is ready I will send an updated package for 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 1282575] Review Request: pmix - Exascale version of PMI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282575



--- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

= Issues =

- [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
 Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
 attached diff).
 See: (this test has no URL)

= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: 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.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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)", "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated".
 135 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/sagitter/FedoraReview/1282575-pmix/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[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.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 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:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in pmix-
 debuginfo
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file 

[Bug 1298665] Review Request: libvma - Dramatically improves performance of socket based applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298665



--- Comment #20 from Michal Schmidt  ---
(In reply to Neil Horman from comment #19)
> alex, I appreciate you looking into it, but I don't believe that the legal
> dual licensing is going to be acceptable for fedora packaging (or Red Hat
> for that matter).  I'm going to ask Red Hat Legal to clarify this but it
> seems to me that, while dual licensing is certainly a legal approach to take
> to open source code, both licenses must be open source compatible for us to
> pacakge the code in Fedora or RHEL.

Neil,
I don't think the dual license (GPLv2 or proprietary) is a problem for
redistribution, but it can be problem w.r.t. contributing patches to upstream.

The software is dual-licensed in the sense that the recipient can choose either
one of the two licenses (GPLv2 or proprietary). So we can ignore the
proprietary option and distribute the software under the terms of GPLv2. So far
so good. Of course asking Legal is the right thing to do if you have any
doubts.

The only problem I can see is if we (or any other Free Software developer)
develop a patch and send it back to Mellanox. If we contribute a patch under
GPLv2, Mellanox will likely refuse to merge it, because then they couldn't
distribute the resulting work under the proprietary license.

Alex, how do you expect to handle patch contributions? Are you going to require
copyright assignment agreements?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1309782] Review Request: bugyou_plugins - Plugins and Services for Bugyou

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309782



--- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System  ---
bugyou_plugins-0.1.3-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-f4d50f0e74

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1309782] Review Request: bugyou_plugins - Plugins and Services for Bugyou

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309782



--- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System  ---
bugyou_plugins-0.1.3-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-27d0f811a2

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1309782] Review Request: bugyou_plugins - Plugins and Services for Bugyou

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309782

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |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 1309782] Review Request: bugyou_plugins - Plugins and Services for Bugyou

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309782



--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System  ---
bugyou_plugins-0.1.3-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-d0739aa4e1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1305496] Review Request: HdrHistogram - A High Dynamic Range Histogram

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305496



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
HdrHistogram-2.1.8-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3cc7c1c581

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1305496] Review Request: HdrHistogram - A High Dynamic Range Histogram

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305496

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1282575] Review Request: pmix - Exascale version of PMI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282575

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|anto.tra...@gmail.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 519652] Review Request: sabnzbdplus - Heavily Featured Automatic Binary Newsgrabber

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=519652

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|fed...@besser82.io  |
   Assignee|fed...@besser82.io  |nob...@fedoraproject.org



-- 
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 1283296] Review Request: pam-u2f - PAM authentication over U2F

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283296

fred  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fredo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #18 from fred  ---
Hi,
I just got offered a yubikey, any news on the support front ? 
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 1300981] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework-braces - Utilities for working with Django-Rest-Framework.

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300981



--- Comment #5 from Sundeep Anand  ---
Thanks for the review!
Have updated SPEC and package:

SPEC:
https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-rest-framework-braces.spec
SRPM:
https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-rest-framework-braces-0.1.6-2.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 1083962] Review Request: maxscale - A database-centric proxy that works with MariaDB and MySQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1083962



--- Comment #25 from Oden Eriksson  ---
Okidoki. New package:

http://nux.se/maxscale/maxscale.spec
http://nux.se/maxscale/maxscale-1.3.0-2.fc24.src.rpm

* Tue 08 Mar 2016 01:00:00 PM CET Oden Eriksson  1.3.0-2
- sync with maxscale-1.3.0-5.mga6.src.rpm:
 - build against system pcre2 libs



$ rpm -qp --requires
/home/oden/RPM/RPMS/x86_64/maxscale-1.3.0-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm | grep pcre
libpcre.so.1()(64bit)
libpcre2-8.so.0()(64bit)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1311045] Review Request: Avago ECD RoCE User space library (libocrdma)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1311045

Honggang LI  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1315609



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1300981] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework-braces - Utilities for working with Django-Rest-Framework.

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300981



--- Comment #4 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
suanand's scratch build of
python-django-rest-framework-braces-0.1.6-2.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13270884

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review