[Bug 1380942] Review Request: jwebunit - Java framework for testing web applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380942 Pavel Alexeev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pa...@hubbitus.info --- Comment #6 from Pavel Alexeev --- What is status of tests? Does it works locally? Did you fill bugs for author? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384048] New: Review Request: python-Flask-APScheduler - Adds APScheduler support to Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384048 Bug ID: 1384048 Summary: Review Request: python-Flask-APScheduler - Adds APScheduler support to Flask Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: david.hanneq...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://hvad.fedorapeople.org/fedora/python-Flask-APScheduler/python-Flask-APScheduler.spec SRPM URL: https://hvad.fedorapeople.org/fedora/python-Flask-APScheduler/python-Flask-APScheduler-1.5.0-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Flask-APScheduler is a Flask extension which adds support for the APScheduler. Fedora Account System Username: hvad -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383680] Review Request: mate-menu - Advanced Menu for the MATE Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383680 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/mate-menu -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1370239] Review Request: python-ansible-tower-cli - A CLI tool for Ansible Tower
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370239 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-ansible-tower-cli -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382908] Review Request: xapps - Common files for XApp desktop apps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382908 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/xapps -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384130] New: Review Request: python3-sqlalchemy - Modular and flexible ORM library for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384130 Bug ID: 1384130 Summary: Review Request: python3-sqlalchemy - Modular and flexible ORM library for python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: or...@cora.nwra.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-sqlalchemy.spec SRPM URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-sqlalchemy-1.1.1-1.el7.src.rpm Description: SQLAlchemy is an Object Relational Mappper (ORM) that provides a flexible, high-level interface to SQL databases. Database and domain concepts are decoupled, allowing both sides maximum flexibility and power. SQLAlchemy provides a powerful mapping layer that can work as automatically or as manually as you choose, determining relationships based on foreign keys or letting you define the join conditions explicitly, to bridge the gap between database and domain. Fedora Account System Username: orion This is an EPEL only package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384133] New: Review Request: python3-suds - A python SOAP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384133 Bug ID: 1384133 Summary: Review Request: python3-suds - A python SOAP client Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: or...@cora.nwra.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-suds.spec SRPM URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-suds-0.6-1.el7.src.rpm Description: The suds project is a python soap web services client lib. Suds leverages python meta programming to provide an intuitive API for consuming web services. Objectification of types defined in the WSDL is provided without class generation. Programmers rarely need to read the WSDL since services and WSDL based objects can be easily inspected. Fedora Account System Username: orion This is an EPEL only package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383781] Review Request: sunflow - A rendering system for photo-realistic image synthesis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383781 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1204777] Review Request: python3-pkgversion-macros - Convenience macros for Fedora/ EPEL Python 3 packages building
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204777 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED CC||or...@cora.nwra.com Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2016-10-12 13:14:04 --- Comment #10 from Orion Poplawski --- Of course, this needs to be retired now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383781] Review Request: sunflow - A rendering system for photo-realistic image synthesis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383781 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo --- Issues: license is MIT. See https://sourceforge.net/p/sunflow/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/LICENSE Use %license macro instead of %doc LICENSE https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package#.25files_example sunflow.jdk.level must be 6 or major, instead of 5 (necessary for JVM >= 1.8) All source files are without license headers. Please, ask to upstream to confirm the licensing of code and/or content/s, and add license headers https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification Please, add better description near the patches -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383781] Review Request: sunflow - A rendering system for photo-realistic image synthesis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383781 gil cattaneo 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1380104] Review Request: python-backports-functools_lru_cache - A backport of functools.lru_cache from Python 3.3 as published at ActiveState
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380104 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-10-12 14:59:20 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1361632] Review Request: python-blowfish - Fast, efficient Blowfish cipher implementation in pure Python (3.4+)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1361632 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-10-12 14:59:24 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- python-blowfish-0.6.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1360255] Review Request: qt5-qtcharts - Qt Charts module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1360255 Raphael Groner changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(he...@kde.org)| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382755] Review Request: legion - A data-centric parallel programming system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382755 --- Comment #6 from Christoph Junghans --- @ignatenko: anything else? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1380442] Review Request: ripgrep - A search tool that combines the usability of ag with the raw speed of grep
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380442 --- Comment #2 from Carl George --- Cargo is now in EPEL7 stable, so that isn't a blocker anymore. Benjamin, can you provide more details about setting "Whiteboard: BuildFails"? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384242] New: Review Request: python-astropy-helpers - Utilities for building and installing Astropy and affiliated package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384242 Bug ID: 1384242 Summary: Review Request: python-astropy-helpers - Utilities for building and installing Astropy and affiliated package Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: or...@cora.nwra.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-astropy-helpers.spec SRPM URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-astropy-helpers-1.2-1.fc26.src.rpm Description: This project provides a Python package, astropy_helpers, which includes many build, installation, and documentation-related tools used by the Astropy project, but packaged separately for use by other projects that wish to leverage this work. Fedora Account System Username: orion scratch build - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16067724 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384249] New: Review Request: python3-ply - Python Lex-Yacc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384249 Bug ID: 1384249 Summary: Review Request: python3-ply - Python Lex-Yacc Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: or...@cora.nwra.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-ply.spec SRPM URL: https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-ply-3.8-1.el7.src.rpm Description: PLY is a straightforward lex/yacc implementation. Here is a list of its essential features: * It is implemented entirely in Python. * It uses LR-parsing which is reasonably efficient and well suited for larger grammars. * PLY provides most of the standard lex/yacc features including support for empty productions, precedence rules, error recovery, and support for ambiguous grammars. * PLY is straightforward to use and provides very extensive error checking. * PLY doesn't try to do anything more or less than provide the basic lex/yacc functionality. In other words, it's not a large parsing framework or a component of some larger system. functionality. In other words, it's not a large parsing framework or a component of some larger system. Fedora Account System Username: orion This is an EPEL only package. Scratch build - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16067960 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382875] Review Request: psad - Port Scan Attack Detector (psad) watches for suspect traffic
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382875 --- Comment #8 from Jens Lody --- (In reply to Jens Lody from comment #7) > Another (important) point: > > psad needs a selinux-policy to work with selinux set to enforcing. As I have seen, a policy for psad is in the selinux-policy-targeted-package, but this has to be fixed for the new version using systemd instead of sysv init-scripts. Who does this normally? How is it triggered ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1372892] Review Request: python-backports-csv - Backport of Python 3' s csv module for Python 2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372892 William Moreno changed: What|Removed |Added CC||williamjmore...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|williamjmore...@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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1373218] Review Request: zstd - Zstd compression library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1373218 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- zstd-1.1.0-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1378028] Review Request: perl-MCE-Shared - MCE extension for sharing data, supporting threads and processes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378028 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- perl-MCE-Shared-1.805-3.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1336552] Review Request: exodusii - Library to store and retrieve transient finite element data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336552 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- exodusii-6.02-5.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1361632] Review Request: python-blowfish - Fast, efficient Blowfish cipher implementation in pure Python (3.4+)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1361632 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- python-blowfish-0.6.1-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1380104] Review Request: python-backports-functools_lru_cache - A backport of functools.lru_cache from Python 3.3 as published at ActiveState
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380104 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- python-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1375744] Review Request: gasnet - A Portable High-Performance Communication Layer for GAS Languages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375744 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- gasnet-1.26.4-5.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383434] Review Request: python-ntlm3 - Python 3 compatible NTLM library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383434
Kevin Fenzi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
* You have license as LGPL3 (which is not a valid License identifier)
, but I think it should be LGPLv3+ (look at setup.py)
That is the only issue I see. Please fix that before importing and
this package is APPROVED.
= MUST items =
Generic:
[*]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "LGPL (v3 or later)", "*No copyright* LGPL (v3 or later)",
"Unknown or generated". 24 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /home/fedora/kevin/1383434-python-
ntlm3/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: 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 4 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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
python2-ntlm3 , python3-ntlm3
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x
[Bug 1373218] Review Request: zstd - Zstd compression library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1373218 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- zstd-1.1.0-1.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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383445] Review Request: python-requests_ntlm - HTTP NTLM authentication using the requests library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383445
Kevin Fenzi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
* Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
(ignore, it's just because it cannot file python{23}-ntlm
I don't see any issues here, so this package is APPROVED.
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/fedora/kevin/1383445-python-
requests_ntlm/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 4 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]: 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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
python2-requests_ntlm , python3-requests_ntlm
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]
[Bug 1372888] Review Request: python-toro - Synchronization primitives for Tornado coroutines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372888
William Moreno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from William Moreno ---
Package Aproved
===
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
---
Checking: python2-toro-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
python3-toro-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
python-toro-1.0.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
python2-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python2-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python2-toro.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/ajdavis/toro
python3-toro.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) coroutines -> co
routines, co-routines, routines
python3-toro.noarch: W: sp
[Bug 1372892] Review Request: python-backports-csv - Backport of Python 3' s csv module for Python 2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372892
--- Comment #1 from William Moreno ---
Package Review
==
Packaging looks good but please ask upstream to provide a license text.
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
This should be fixed by: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372890
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.5/site-
packages/backports, /usr/lib/python3.5/site-
packages/backports/__pycache__
= 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.
[-]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
---
Checking: python2-backports-csv-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
python3-backports-csv-1.0.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
python-backports-csv-1.0.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
python2-backports-csv.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Backport -> Back
port, Back-port, Backpacker
python2-backports-csv.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Backport
-> Back port, Back-port, Backpacker
python2-backports-csv.noarch: W: spel
[Bug 1370239] Review Request: python-ansible-tower-cli - A CLI tool for Ansible Tower
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370239 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- python-ansible-tower-cli-3.0.1-1.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-2016-77ab5bfecc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382811] Un-Retirement Review: appmenu-qt5 - Support for global DBus-exported application menu in Qt5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382811 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- appmenu-qt5-0.3.0+16.10.20160628.1-1.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-2016-62e1276309 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1381029] Review Request: python-more-itertools - Python library for efficient use of itertools utility in python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381029 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- python-more-itertools-2.2-3.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-2016-1ea8ae0b3f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383474] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Calendar-Julian - Julian Calendar support for DateTime.pm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383474 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ON_QA --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DateTime-Calendar-Julian-0.04-3.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-2016-6b2bbe9827 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1341099] Review Request: taskotron-trigger - Triggering Taskotron jobs on fedmsgs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341099 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- taskotron-trigger-0.4.0-1.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-2016-74b0f2a36a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1372889] Review Request: python-thriftpy - Pure Python implementation of Apache Thrift
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372889
William Moreno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from William Moreno ---
Package Aproved
===
= MUST items =
C/C++:
This is aceptable in python modules with compiled extensions.
[-]: 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.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
---
Checking: python2-thriftpy-0.3.9-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm
python3-thriftpy-0.3.9-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm
python-thriftpy-debuginfo-0.3.9-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm
python-thriftpy-0.3.9-1.fc26.src.rpm
python2-thriftpy.x86_64: W: spelling
[Bug 1358739] Review Request: python-msrest - AutoRest swagger generator Python client runtime
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358739
--- Comment #5 from William Moreno ---
Package Review
==
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
= 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.
[-]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
[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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
---
Checking: python2-msrest-0.4.4-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
python3-msrest-0.4.4-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
python-msrest-0.4.4-1.fc26.src.rpm
python2-msrest.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudiment
python2-msrest.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run
time, run-time, rudiment
python3-msrest.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudiment
python3-msrest.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run
time, run-time, rudiment
python-msrest.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudiment
python-msrest.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time,
run-time, rudimen
[Bug 1020292] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer-to-peer digital currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292 --- Comment #41 from Warren Togami --- Bitcoin is now getting close to building a self-hosted, general purpose deterministic toolchain. This toolchain will eventually be buildable from any Linux distro, and using it in a controlled manner will allow building binaries that are bit-for-bit identical no matter what Linux system you built it upon. I think this is the highest level of assurance we can realistically achieve in guarding against potential compromise. When this toolchain is ready we'll be able to separately package it in Fedora and use it to build a Bitcoin RPM where the binary output could be identical to binaries that we build elsewhere. It could be compared to be similar in concept to a cross-compilation toolchain. Now it is a separate question if Fedora would allow special casing beyond the normal packaging guidelines to allow for the use of such a different build toolchain. Another question is if Fedora will allow special casing to allow Bitcoin to ship with its own static linked copies of libraries that it maintains internally. This is the only way it can achieve bit-for-bit determinism. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Chromium Historically Chromium was not allowed into Fedora because it relied upon Google maintained internal copies of libraries, but it seems this was allowed into Fedora August 2016. Looking at the .spec it looks like Fedora must have allowed it in as a special case, as it ships its own internal Google-maintained libraries. I wonder if they decided to just trust that the libraries maintained by the vendor are well cared for. So perhaps this a good sign that Fedora may allow this crazy package to be built in a way that is compatible with upstream's security concerns. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1370239] Review Request: python-ansible-tower-cli - A CLI tool for Ansible Tower
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370239 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- python-ansible-tower-cli-3.0.1-1.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-2016-18556cfcb3 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1381029] Review Request: python-more-itertools - Python library for efficient use of itertools utility in python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381029 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- python-more-itertools-2.2-3.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-f96eca6ede -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382811] Un-Retirement Review: appmenu-qt5 - Support for global DBus-exported application menu in Qt5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382811 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- appmenu-qt5-0.3.0+16.10.20160628.1-1.fc24, cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu-0.6-1.git20160913.5b55d2d.fc24, unity-gtk-module-0.0.0+16.10.20160913-1.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-aa3eace46c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382810] Review Request: cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu - Ubuntu AppMenu support for Cinnamon Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382810 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- appmenu-qt5-0.3.0+16.10.20160628.1-1.fc24, cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu-0.6-1.git20160913.5b55d2d.fc24, unity-gtk-module-0.0.0+16.10.20160913-1.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-aa3eace46c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383474] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Calendar-Julian - Julian Calendar support for DateTime.pm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383474 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DateTime-Calendar-Julian-0.04-3.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-2016-5a26adaf32 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382813] Review Request: unity-gtk-module - GTK+ module for exporting old-style menus as GMenuModels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382813 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- appmenu-qt5-0.3.0+16.10.20160628.1-1.fc24, cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu-0.6-1.git20160913.5b55d2d.fc24, unity-gtk-module-0.0.0+16.10.20160913-1.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-aa3eace46c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1341099] Review Request: taskotron-trigger - Triggering Taskotron jobs on fedmsgs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341099 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- taskotron-trigger-0.4.0-1.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-2016-6bd8252b0a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1324784] Review Request: pseudo - Advanced tool for simulating superuser privileges
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324784 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- pseudo-1.8.1-3.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-a7c7a9beb0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1366047] Review Request: tss2 - IBM's TSS 2.0
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366047 --- Comment #49 from l...@us.ibm.com --- I could find the LICENSE file under /usr/share/doc/tss2-713/ in RHEL6, but the "%license LICENSE" seemed to have ignored by Fedora. I couldn't find the LICENSE file anywhere, nor could I find much info about it. Does anyone know what's going on? please advise. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1020292] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer-to-peer digital currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292 --- Comment #42 from Warren Togami --- Hmm, looking deeper at the chromium.spec it appears that we actually mostly rely on Fedora's libraries, so this isn't a good point of comparison. I think given the upcoming deterministic toolchain we can at least hopefully look forward toward a COPR or maybe upstream yum/dnf repo. There remains the concern that upstream is against automatic upgrades. I don't have a good suggestion for dealing with this issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1381029] Review Request: python-more-itertools - Python library for efficient use of itertools utility in python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381029 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- python-more-itertools-2.2-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-4a7838446f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1370239] Review Request: python-ansible-tower-cli - A CLI tool for Ansible Tower
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370239 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-ansible-tower-cli-3.0.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-e996dab1a4 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382813] Review Request: unity-gtk-module - GTK+ module for exporting old-style menus as GMenuModels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382813 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- appmenu-qt5-0.3.0+16.10.20160628.1-1.fc25, cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu-0.6-1.git20160913.5b55d2d.fc25, unity-gtk-module-0.0.0+16.10.20160913-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-cda26e7897 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382810] Review Request: cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu - Ubuntu AppMenu support for Cinnamon Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382810 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- appmenu-qt5-0.3.0+16.10.20160628.1-1.fc25, cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu-0.6-1.git20160913.5b55d2d.fc25, unity-gtk-module-0.0.0+16.10.20160913-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-cda26e7897 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1382811] Un-Retirement Review: appmenu-qt5 - Support for global DBus-exported application menu in Qt5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382811 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- appmenu-qt5-0.3.0+16.10.20160628.1-1.fc25, cinnamon-applet-globalappmenu-0.6-1.git20160913.5b55d2d.fc25, unity-gtk-module-0.0.0+16.10.20160913-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-cda26e7897 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1341099] Review Request: taskotron-trigger - Triggering Taskotron jobs on fedmsgs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341099 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- taskotron-trigger-0.4.0-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-47efa5e800 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1324784] Review Request: pseudo - Advanced tool for simulating superuser privileges
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324784 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- pseudo-1.8.1-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-f29333e0be -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1383474] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Calendar-Julian - Julian Calendar support for DateTime.pm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383474 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DateTime-Calendar-Julian-0.04-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-24e9770688 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384317] New: Review Request: php-pecl-uopz - User Operations for Zend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384317 Bug ID: 1384317 Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-uopz - User Operations for Zend Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fed...@famillecollet.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/remicollet/remirepo/da4b04ee8525bca04a464f1d9cc630172502ed0b/php/pecl/php-pecl-uopz/fedora/php-pecl-uopz.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.remirepo.net/SRPMS/php-pecl-uopz-5.0.1-1.fc23.remi.src.rpm Description: User Operations for Zend: doing things you probably shouldn't since 2014. The uopz extension exposes Zend engine functionality normally used at compilation and execution time in order to allow modification of the internal structures that represent PHP code. It supports the following activities: - Overloading some Zend opcodes including exit/new and composure opcodes - Renaming functions and methods - Aliasing functions and methods - Deletion of functions and methods - Redefinition of constants - Deletion of constants - Runtime composition and modification of classes Documentation: http://php.net/uopz Fedora Account System Username: remi --- This package is for PHP 7, so Fedora 25+ only (Perhaps I will push later the PHP 5 compatible version in other branch) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384317] Review Request: php-pecl-uopz - User Operations for Zend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384317 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sh...@iwin.ski Alias||php-pecl-uopz --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet --- This extension is an optional dependency of PHPUnit (sebastian/global-state), required for some test suites (e.g. the sentry/sentry one). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1380442] Review Request: ripgrep - A search tool that combines the usability of ag with the raw speed of grep
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380442 --- Comment #3 from Benjamin Lefoul --- Hello Carl, Have a look at this: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16072474 "BuildError: error building package (arch x86_64), mock exited with status 1; see build.log for more information" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
