[Bug 1333235] New: Review Request: gap-pkg-crisp - Computing subgroups of finite soluble groups

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333235

Bug ID: 1333235
   Summary: Review Request: gap-pkg-crisp - Computing subgroups of
finite soluble groups
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-crisp/gap-pkg-crisp.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-crisp/gap-pkg-crisp-1.4.4-1.fc25.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: jjames
Description: CRISP (Computing with Radicals, Injectors, Schunck classes and
Projectors) provides algorithms for computing subgroups of finite soluble
groups related to group classes.  In particular, it allows to compute
F-radicals and F-injectors for Fitting classes (and Fitting sets) F,
F-residuals for formations F, and X-projectors for Schunck classes X.  In order
to carry out these computations, the group classes F and X must be given by an
algorithm which decides membership in the group class.

Moreover, CRISP contains algorithms for the computation of normal subgroups
invariant under a prescribed set of automorphisms and belonging to a given
group class.  This includes an improved method to compute the set of all normal
subgroups of a finite soluble group, its characteristic subgroups, and the
socle and p-socles for given primes p.

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

[Bug 1328350] Review Request: python-osrf-pycommon - Commonly needed Python modules used by software developed at OSRF

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328350

Scott K Logan  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
   |python-osrf_pycommon -  |python-osrf-pycommon -
   |Commonly needed Python  |Commonly needed Python
   |modules used by software|modules used by software
   |developed at OSRF   |developed at OSRF



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

[Bug 1332344] Review Request: phototonic - Image viewer and organizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332344



--- Comment #3 from Michael Cullen  ---
Updated version now upstream have tagged a release properly:

Spec URL:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/mich181189/phototonic/phototonic.git/plain/phototonic.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mich181189/phototonic/fedora-24-x86_64/00183358-phototonic/phototonic-1.7.20-1.fc24.src.rpm

scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13925343

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

[Bug 1332344] Review Request: phototonic - Image viewer and organizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332344



--- Comment #2 from Michael Cullen  ---
I've also commented on https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999

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

[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999

Michael Cullen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mich...@cullen-online.com



--- Comment #4 from Michael Cullen  ---
*Unofficial comments - I too am waiting for a sponsor *

Minor, mostly personal choice point first: you don't need the "sum" global -
just include the summary in the header as usual and then use %{summary} where
you need it. Though having said that, the python sample spec file does it your
way. I just like keeping extra macros to a minimum.

The Group tag is not needed [1]

Ideally the description would be a little bit more than just the summary

rpmlint is clean, which is good

license looks fine


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

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

[Bug 1333204] New: Review Request: gap-pkg-utils - Utility functions for GAP

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333204

Bug ID: 1333204
   Summary: Review Request: gap-pkg-utils - Utility functions for
GAP
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-utils/gap-pkg-utils.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-utils/gap-pkg-utils-0.40-1.fc25.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: jjames
Description: This GAP package provides a collection of utility functions
gleaned from many 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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1332344] Review Request: phototonic - Image viewer and organizer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332344

Mukundan Ragavan  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||nonamed...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nonamed...@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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1223887] Review Request: atomicapp - Reference implementation of the Nulecule container application Specification

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223887



--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System  ---
atomicapp-0.4.5-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 1307228] Review Request: dynafed- The Dynamic Federations system allows to expose via HTTP and WebDAV a very fast dynamic name space

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307228



--- Comment #9 from Adrien Devresse  ---
Hi Andrea,

Thx for the update:

Build rawhide :

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922533

PASSED

build epel7 :

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922570 

PASSED

build epel6 :

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922678

PASSED

build fedora 24

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13922953

PASSED

MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]

dynafed.src: E: description-line-too-long C The Dynafed project provides a
dynamic, scalable HTTP resource federation mechanism for distributed storage
systems.
dynafed.src: E: description-line-too-long C The default deployment style is
accessible by any HTTP/Webdav compatible client. The core components can be
used to design frontends based on other protocols.
dynafed.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed.src:37: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 37, tab: line 17)
dynafed.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://grid-deployment.web.cern.ch/grid-deployment/dms/lcgutil/tar/dynafed/dynafed-1.2.0.tar.gz
HTTP Error 404: Not Found

dynafed.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The Dynafed project provides a
dynamic, scalable HTTP resource federation mechanism for distributed storage
systems.
dynafed.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The default deployment style is
accessible by any HTTP/Webdav compatible client. The core components can be
used to design frontends based on other protocols.
dynafed.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/libugrconnector.so.1.2.0
dynafed.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libugrconnector.so.1.2.0
exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
dynafed.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/ugr-server
dynafed.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/dynafed-1.2.0/RELEASE-NOTES
dynafed.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /etc/ugr/conf.d/ugrauth_example.py 644
/usr/bin/python
dynafed.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig

dynafed-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C dmlite plugin for
dynafed
dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/ugr/libugrdmlite.so
dynafed-dmlite-frontend.x86_64: W: no-documentation
d
ynafed-dmlite-plugin.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C dmlite plugin for
dynafed
dynafed-dmlite-plugin.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed-dmlite-plugin.x86_64: W: no-documentation

dynafed-http-plugin.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed-http-plugin.x86_64: W: no-documentation
dynafed-lfc-plugin.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed-lfc-plugin.x86_64: W: no-documentation

dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on
dynafed-private/dynafed-private-libs/libdynafed-private
dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
dynafed-private-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 23 warnings.



OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.

   -> Apache 2.0

OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[3]
N/A: 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 must be included in %license.[4]
OK: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]

FAIL: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it is
used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.


http://grid-deployment.web.cern.ch/grid-deployment/dms/lcgutil/tar/dynafed/dynafed-1.2.0.tar.gz
-> No File

OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]

  -> compile for all


N/A: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the

[Bug 1307228] Review Request: dynafed- The Dynamic Federations system allows to expose via HTTP and WebDAV a very fast dynamic name space

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307228

Adrien Devresse  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1329848] Review Request: erlang-parse_trans - Parse transform utilities for Erlang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329848



--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov  ---
Thanks, Randy!

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

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

[bugzilla]

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

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:54:23



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

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

[bugzilla]

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



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
pam-u2f-1.0.3-5.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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1328390] Review Request: infinipath-psm - Intel Performance Scaled Messaging (PSM) Libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:54:02



-- 
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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1316186] Review Request: python-librosa - a python package for music and audio analysis

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316186



--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-librosa-0.4.2-1.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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1316186] Review Request: python-librosa - a python package for music and audio analysis

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316186

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:54:09



-- 
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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1328390] Review Request: infinipath-psm - Intel Performance Scaled Messaging (PSM) Libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
infinipath-psm-3.3-22_g4abbc60_open.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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1319289] Review Request: rubygem-review - Flexible document format/conversion system

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319289



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
rubygem-review-1.7.2-3.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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1319289] Review Request: rubygem-review - Flexible document format/conversion system

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319289

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2016-05-04 14:52:51



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

[Bug 1329848] Review Request: erlang-parse_trans - Parse transform utilities for Erlang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329848

Randy Barlow  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Randy Barlow  ---
It looks like most of the source files are the Erlang Public License, and one
of them is ASL 2.0. Can you update the license to say EPL 1.1 and ASL 2.0?

I'm going to pass it, but make sure you update the license text to be correct.
Nice work!

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]: 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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 13 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in /home/rbarlow/review/1329848-erlang-
 parse_trans/licensecheck.txt
 rbarlow: Make sure to put "EPL 1.1 and ASL 2.0" as the license.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 81920 bytes in 28 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]: 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.
 rbarlow: I'd suggest requesting a license file from upstream.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: 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 

[Bug 1329848] Review Request: erlang-parse_trans - Parse transform utilities for Erlang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329848

Randy Barlow  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rbar...@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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 537366] Review Request: cgal-python - Python bindings for the CGAL library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537366

Laurent Rineau  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(pro...@gmail.com) |needinfo-



-- 
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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1307134] Review Request: mkdocs-alabaster - Alabaster port for MkDocs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307134

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
mkdocs-alabaster-0.7.1-1.fc24, mkdocs-basic-theme-1.0.1-3.fc24,
mkdocs-cinder-0.9.3-1.fc24, mkdocs-material-0.2.2-1.fc24 has been pushed to the
Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it
in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-988ac47c35

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

[Bug 1332605] Review Request: gap-pkg-openmath - Import and export of OpenMath objects for GAP

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332605

Till Hofmann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Till Hofmann  ---
(In reply to Jerry James from comment #2)
> (In reply to Till Hofmann from comment #1)
> > - Why do you have some documentation in /usr/lib/gap/pkg/openmath/doc and
> > some in /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-openmath/? Does gap expect documentation in
> > /usr/lib/gap/? Why not put everything in /usr/share/doc?
> 
> Yes, gap has an online documentation browser, which expects to find
> documentation alongside the actual code (actually, wherever PackageInfo.g
> says the documentation is located).  The files in /usr/share/doc are those
> that the online documentation browser would not look for.
> 

That makes sense, so this is okay.

> > rpmlint:
> > gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
> > /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-openmath/GPL
> > --> This should be reported upstream.
> 
> Okay, I will do so.  Thank you for the review!

Thanks for packaging!

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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1332206] Review Request: python-pysocks - A Python SOCKS client module

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332206



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-pysocks-1.5.6-2.fc24, python-requests-2.10.0-1.fc24,
python-urllib3-1.15.1-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-5fd6be4390

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

[Bug 1307149] Review Request: mkdocs-material - A material design theme for MkDocs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307149

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
mkdocs-alabaster-0.7.1-1.fc24, mkdocs-basic-theme-1.0.1-3.fc24,
mkdocs-cinder-0.9.3-1.fc24, mkdocs-material-0.2.2-1.fc24 has been pushed to the
Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it
in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-988ac47c35

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

[Bug 1307132] Review Request: mkdocs-cinder - A clean responsive theme for the MkDocs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307132

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
mkdocs-alabaster-0.7.1-1.fc24, mkdocs-basic-theme-1.0.1-3.fc24,
mkdocs-cinder-0.9.3-1.fc24, mkdocs-material-0.2.2-1.fc24 has been pushed to the
Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it
in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-988ac47c35

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

[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999



--- Comment #3 from Lukas Brabec  ---
I initially included python3 but I found that `python3 setup.py test` fails in
several testcases. I decided not to include python3 until the testsuite passes
without failures or errors.

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

[Bug 1332605] Review Request: gap-pkg-openmath - Import and export of OpenMath objects for GAP

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332605

Jerry James  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #2 from Jerry James  ---
(In reply to Till Hofmann from comment #1)
> - Why do you have some documentation in /usr/lib/gap/pkg/openmath/doc and
> some in /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-openmath/? Does gap expect documentation in
> /usr/lib/gap/? Why not put everything in /usr/share/doc?

Yes, gap has an online documentation browser, which expects to find
documentation alongside the actual code (actually, wherever PackageInfo.g says
the documentation is located).  The files in /usr/share/doc are those that the
online documentation browser would not look for.

> - The source files don't have a valid copying permission statement (i.e. a
> statement saying 'This file is licensed under GPLv2+') which is not perfect
> but not a blocker.

I'm afraid that the gap community in general is a little bit sloppy about
license notifications, although there are a handful of gap package authors who
understand the issues involved and are careful about license statements.

> rpmlint:
> gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
> /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-openmath/GPL
> --> This should be reported upstream.

Okay, I will do so.  Thank you 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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999

Stanislav Ochotnicky  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||socho...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Stanislav Ochotnicky  ---
The package looks good to me generally - pretty small/clean. Why no Python 3
though? It seems to build fine

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

[Bug 1332999] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999

Lukas Brabec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)



--- Comment #1 from Lukas Brabec  ---
This is my first package, so I need sponsor.


We need this package for Taskotron [1], to parse XML output of pytest and
unittest.

[1] https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/


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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1332999] New: Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332999

Bug ID: 1332999
   Summary: Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/XUnit
XML files and map them to Python objects
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: lbra...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://lbrabec.fedorapeople.org/python-xunitparser.spec
SRPM URL:
https://lbrabec.fedorapeople.org/python-xunitparser-1.3.3-1.fc24.src.rpm
Description: Read JUnit/XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects
Fedora Account System Username: lbrabec

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

[Bug 1327781] Review Request: golang-github-olivere-elastic - Elasticsearch client for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327781



--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-olivere-elastic

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

[Bug 1327762] Review Request: golang-github-Shopify-sarama - Sarama is a Go library for Apache Kafka 0.8 and 0.9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327762



--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-Shopify-sarama

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

[Bug 1327753] Review Request: golang-github-Shopify-toxiproxy - A proxy to simulate network and system conditions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327753



--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-Shopify-toxiproxy

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

[Bug 1327307] Review Request: golang-github-eapache-go-resiliency - Resiliency patterns for golang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327307



--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-eapache-go-resiliency

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

[Bug 1329448] Review Request: Tbootxm - trusted host with boot time integrity checks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329448

Neil Horman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nhor...@redhat.com,
   ||saurabh.kulka...@intel.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nhor...@redhat.com
  Flags||needinfo?(saurabh.kulkarni@
   ||intel.com)



--- Comment #2 from Neil Horman  ---
yeah, saurabh, please read over the Fedora package review process before
opening a bugzilla:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process

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

[Bug 1327291] Review Request: golang-github-mistifyio-go-zfs - Go wrappers for ZFS commands

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327291



--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-mistifyio-go-zfs

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

[Bug 1329844] Review Request: erlang-clique - CLI Framework for Erlang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329844



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
erlang-clique-0.3.5-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-c4fa6fa7e5

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

[Bug 1264715] Review Request: flacon - Audio File Encoder

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264715



--- Comment #7 from Jiri Eischmann  ---
Created attachment 1153833
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1153833=edit
appstream metadata file

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

[Bug 1264715] Review Request: flacon - Audio File Encoder

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264715



--- Comment #6 from Jiri Eischmann  ---
I think you don't need to own the directories reported by fedora-review. So
only unsolved problems is the reported missing dependency (libfishsound) and
missing appdata file. I've created one for you (see the attachment). Since it's
not shipped by upstream (you should definitely propose it there) the best way
is to include in the spec file. See e.g. the spec file of Inkscape package how
to do it. See the linked guidelines above to learn how to install and verify an
appdata file.
Also the license should probably be LGPL-2.1. That's also what the upstream RPM
spec file says.

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

[Bug 1327254] Review Request: golang-github-eapache-queue - Fast golang queue using ring-buffer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327254



--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/golang-github-eapache-queue

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

[Bug 1328041] Review Request: musicqueue - Music orgainizer and player based on a fork of Guayadeque

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328041



--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/musicqueue

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

[Bug 1329844] Review Request: erlang-clique - CLI Framework for Erlang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329844



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
erlang-clique-0.3.5-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-bd582cc12c

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

[Bug 1329844] Review Request: erlang-clique - CLI Framework for Erlang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329844

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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1264715] Review Request: flacon - Audio File Encoder

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264715



--- Comment #5 from Jiri Eischmann  ---
I was finally able to run fedora-review on the package:

Package Review
==

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



= 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]: 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.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 10 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/eischmann/1264715-flacon/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners:
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32, /usr/share/icons/hicolor
[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.
[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.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
Missing libfishsound
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package
 contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry.
 Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in flacon
[x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
 contains icons.
 Note: icons in flacon
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: 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:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final 

[Bug 1332605] Review Request: gap-pkg-openmath - Import and export of OpenMath objects for GAP

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332605



--- Comment #1 from Till Hofmann  ---
Some issues/remarks:

- Why do you have some documentation in /usr/lib/gap/pkg/openmath/doc and some
in /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-openmath/? Does gap expect documentation in
/usr/lib/gap/? Why not put everything in /usr/share/doc?
- The source files don't have a valid copying permission statement (i.e. a
statement saying 'This file is licensed under GPLv2+') which is not perfect but
not a blocker.

rpmlint:
gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-openmath/GPL
--> This should be reported upstream.
gap-pkg-openmath.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
--> OK.

Other than that, the package looks good.


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: "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 16
 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/till/fedora-review/1332605-gap-pkg-openmath/licensecheck.txt
 Remark: The source files don't have a valid copying permission statement
 (i.e. a statement saying 'This file is licensed under GPLv2+') which
 is not perfect but not a blocker.
[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 3 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.
 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on 

[Bug 1308985] Review Request: vulkan - Vulkan loader and validation layers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308985

jan p. springer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||j...@igroup.org



--- Comment #12 from jan p. springer  ---
any chance the lunarg tools from the sdk could be included?

% ls -1 lunarg-vulkan-sdk/1.0.11.0/x86_64/bin

glslangValidator
spirv-as
spirv-dis
spirv-remap
vkjson_info
vkreplay
vktrace
vulkaninfo

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

[Bug 1332206] Review Request: python-pysocks - A Python SOCKS client module

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332206



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-pysocks-1.5.6-2.fc23, python-requests-2.10.0-1.fc23,
python-urllib3-1.15.1-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b9b61b26d3

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

[Bug 1332206] Review Request: python-pysocks - A Python SOCKS client module

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332206

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-pysocks-1.5.6-2.fc22, python-requests-2.10.0-1.fc22,
python-urllib3-1.15.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-a5e7a7d75b

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

[Bug 1270322] Review Request: chromium - A WebKit (Blink) powered web browser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270322



--- Comment #41 from Tomas Popela  ---
Also I should note, that the status of the GN is not that great for building
with out of tree builds (from tarballs) as you can see in [0]. Actually it was
the reason why I didn't complete the previous work and it seems that the
situation didn't changed a lot..

[0] -
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/chromium-dev/3NAXifb84dk

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