[Bug 1384984] Review Request: rubygem-strptime - Fast strptime engine

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384984

Eduardo Mayorga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||e...@mayorgalinux.com



--- Comment #1 from Eduardo Mayorga  ---
SRPM URL returns 404 not found.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419259] Review Request: rubygem-rake-contrib - Additional libraries for Rake

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419259

Eduardo Mayorga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||e...@mayorgalinux.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|e...@mayorgalinux.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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-IO-Socket-Multicast-1.12-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7
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-EPEL-2017-b38ceab340

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417405] Review Request: prelude-lml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417405



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
prelude-lml-3.1.0-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2017-c9f60edbb8

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417495] Review Request: prelude-manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417495



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
prelude-manager-3.1.0-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2017-409ef6f707

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-IO-Socket-Multicast-1.12-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6
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-EPEL-2017-2cda8d0e61

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-IO-Socket-Multicast-1.12-2.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-2017-30fc6be997

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1412068] Review Request: ufw-kde - UFW control module for KDE

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1412068

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
ufw-kde-0.5.0-0.5.20161006git.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-2017-7f4305beb2

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417405] Review Request: prelude-lml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417405

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
prelude-lml-3.1.0-1.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-2017-f7c895b586

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417495] Review Request: prelude-manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417495

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
prelude-manager-3.1.0-1.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-2017-935389ae93

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1416523] Review Request: pantheon-photos - Pantheon photo manager and viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1416523

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-02-07 20:50:55



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
pantheon-photos-0.2.1.1-4.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 1410009] Review Request: mimic - Mycroft's TTS engine, based on CMU' s Flite

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1410009



--- Comment #1 from Paul Whalen  ---

Issues to be resolved:
==

* Source url doesn't seem to work
* License should be reviewed, doesn't match
* rpath should be removed
* Shorten the description
* Fix version in the changelog
* undefined-non-weak-symbol should be looked at/reported upstream, but not a
blocker


Package Review
==

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


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[!]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
 Note: See rpmlint output
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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: "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "Apache",
 "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "BSD". 451 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/pwhalen/1410009-mimic/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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 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:
[!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
 Note: Could not download Source0:
 https://github.com/MycroftAI/mimic/archive/mimic-1.1.0.tar.gz
 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags
[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 provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in 

[Bug 1419152] Review Request: rubygem-memfs - fake file system that can be used for tests

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419152

Eduardo Mayorga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Eduardo Mayorga  ---
Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Package contains Requires: ruby(release). rubygems-devel will drag it, so you
can drop it.


= 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 must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Ruby:
[x]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform
 independent under %{gem_dir}.
[x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage
[x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated.
[x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name}
[x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel.
[x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro.
[x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch
[x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi).

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
 Note: Package contains font files
[-]: 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 rubygem-
 memfs-doc
[?]: 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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on 

[Bug 1420153] New: Review Request: - < short summary here>

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420153

Bug ID: 1420153
   Summary: Review Request:  - 
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: ra...@electronsweatshop.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/js-jquery-jstree.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/js-jquery-jstree-3.3.3-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: jsTree is jquery plugin, that provides interactive trees. It is
absolutely free, open source and distributed under the MIT license.

jsTree is easily extendable, themable and configurable, it supports HTML
& JSON data sources, AJAX & async callback loading.

jsTree functions properly in either box-model (content-box or   
border-box), can be loaded as an AMD module, and has a built in mobile  
theme for responsive design, that can easily be customized. It uses 
jQuery's event system, so binding callbacks on various events in the
tree is familiar and easy.
Fedora Account System Username: bowlofeggs

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1416455] Review Request: python-easywatch - super simple directory monitoring

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1416455



--- Comment #1 from Athos Ribeiro  ---
Hello Fabio,

The summary for the python3 package is the summary of another package. You
could use the summary macro to avoid that.

It would be nice ask upstream to add tags to avoid getting sources from the
commits (of course this is not a blocker).

rpmlint has this warning, would you fix it (not a blocker)?
python2-easywatch.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C super simple directory
monitoring


This is the docstring for easywatch/easywatch.py
"""
Simple static page generator.
Uses jinja2 to compile templates.
Templates should live inside `./templates` and will be compiled in '.'.
"""

It would be nice to patch it and send it upstream.

python3 package fails importing watchdog function (see __init__.py), here is
the  error message:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "", line 1, in 
  File "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/easywatch/__init__.py", line 1, in

from easywatch import watch
ImportError: cannot import name 'watch'

This happens because __init__.py has a relative import (see
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0404/). I'd say the package is not python3
compatible yet (probably just because of that import)


Finally, there are Requires: missing, as you can see below:

in easywatch/easywatch.py we have:
from watchdog.observers import Observer
from watchdog.events import FileSystemEventHandler

importing the python2 package results in:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "", line 1, in 
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'watchdog'

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1402590] Review Request: ecryptfs-simple - A CLI front end to ecryptfs that works with normal user account

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1402590



--- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter  ---
naming: ok

sources: ok
09d747c5bf7e071f10c3b0833dd3400b  ecryptfs-simple.2016.11.16.1.tar.xz

1.  hardended_build, agree with sentiments so far, including the macro here
serves no useful purpose, SHOULD remove it

2.  MUST add
BuildRequires: gcc
(gcc-c++ appears unused).  all dependencies must be explicitly included (should
not implicitly rely on other packages to pull this in for you).
Given this addition, then you SHOULD remove:
BuildRequires: glibc-devel
(it is a direct dependency of gcc)

3.  SHOULD use
make install/fast ...
instead of
%{make_install}
macro (which is tailored for autoconf/automake projects)

4. MUST remove scriptlet:
%post
chmod 4755 %{_bindir}/%{name}
if the binary needs special permissions, either fix in %install or do it via
%attr, not in a scriptlet

5.  licensing not ok, MUST change to
License: GPLv2
included ecryptfs-simple.c is clearly v2 only (no ... or later clause).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1402590] Review Request: ecryptfs-simple - A CLI front end to ecryptfs that works with normal user account

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1402590

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter  ---
I can review this.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1327635] Review Request: openstack-congress - OpenStack Congress Service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327635

Javier Peña  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
   Assignee|dra...@redhat.com   |jp...@redhat.com
  Flags||rdo-review+



--- Comment #17 from Javier Peña  ---
- The SRPM differences with the spec are expected, since it's generated by
DLRN. Same goes for the tarball not being downloadable.

The package is APPROVED.

Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Dist tag is present.


= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Apache (v2.0)", "*No copyright* Apache", "BSD (3 clause)",
 "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 388 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/congress
 /review-openstack-congress/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/openstack-dashboard, /usr/share
 /openstack-dashboard/openstack_dashboard/local/enabled, /etc
 /openstack-dashboard/enabled, /usr/share/openstack-
 dashboard/openstack_dashboard, /usr/share/openstack-
 dashboard/openstack_dashboard/local, /etc/openstack-dashboard
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/openstack-
 dashboard/openstack_dashboard/local/enabled, /usr/share/openstack-
 dashboard/openstack_dashboard/local, /etc/openstack-dashboard/enabled,
 /usr/share/openstack-dashboard/openstack_dashboard, /etc/logrotate.d,
 /usr/share/openstack-dashboard, /etc/openstack-dashboard
[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.
[x]: 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 40960 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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:

[Bug 1327635] Review Request: openstack-congress - OpenStack Congress Service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327635



--- Comment #16 from Javier Peña  ---
After another update:

- Spec:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rdo-packages/congress-distgit/rpm-master/openstack-congress.spec
- SRPM:
http://46.231.132.68:8080/v1/AUTH_b50e80d3969f441a8b7b1fe831003e0a/rdoartifacts/31/4931/1/gate/DLRN-rpmbuild/Z884f0394d23d49b5a05306f7d196382c/artifacts/centos/repos/54/92/54926c44114800c0112099d57e04f209191737ba_dev/openstack-congress-5.0.0-0.20170207183957.54926c4.el7.centos.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1418310] Review Request: perl-SOAP-WSDL - Perl module for SOAP with WSDL support

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1418310



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

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420124] New: Review Request: python-django-rest-framework-composed-permissions - Composed permissions for django-rest-framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420124

Bug ID: 1420124
   Summary: Review Request:
python-django-rest-framework-composed-permissions -
Composed permissions for django-rest-framework
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rb...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org




Spec URL:
http://ralph.fedorapeople.org//python-django-rest-framework-composed-permissions.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ralph.fedorapeople.org//python-django-rest-framework-composed-permissions-0.1-1.fc25.src.rpm

Description:
A simple way to define complex permissions for django-rest-framework.

https://djangorestframework-composed-permissions.readthedocs.org/en/latest/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420124] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework-composed-permissions - Composed permissions for django-rest-framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420124



--- Comment #1 from Ralph Bean  ---
This package built on koji: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17658617

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1268360] Review Request: rubygem-simple_oauth - Simply builds and verifies OAuth headers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268360

Ilya Gradina  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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1415331] Review Request: python-enjarify - Translate Dalvik bytecode to equivalent Java bytecode

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1415331

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||http://bugs.debian.org/8545
   ||15



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1415331] Review Request: python-enjarify - Translate Dalvik bytecode to equivalent Java bytecode

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1415331



--- Comment #2 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Thank you for the review.

> - Please try to send your patches to upstream: manpage, install and start
> script.
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
> Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
The man page is from debian. I submitted a bug report asking them to upstream
it.

Upstream provides a much more involved script which tries to detect python3 and
pypy, which is not suitable for Fedora, since we want to use %__python3
unconditionally. The script create in the spec file is one line and it's not
suitable for upstream, for example `-O` is only useful for packaged
applications where the user does not have write permission to the installation
directory and byte-compilation is done externally.

> - Why does upstream not provide a build/install environment? A proper build
> script can avoid confusion about right build flags. Maybe we can suggest
> setuptools.
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Byte_compiling
This is what upstream recommends in the README. The installation is trivial, so
I don't think this is much of an issue.

> - The sitelib folder should be in a separate subpackage python3-enjarify
> with support for the virtual provides of python-enjarify.
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#The_.25python_provide_macro
I renamed the main package to enjarify. This actually matches what upstream
uses for the project name better, and added the python3-subpackage and
%python_provide.

> - Manpage is special documentation without the need to be marked with %doc.
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Manpages
Fixed.

> - Please use also install -p for the manpage to preserve original timestamp.
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps
Fixed.

Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/enjarify.spec
SRPM URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/enjarify-1.0.3-1.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1418310] Review Request: perl-SOAP-WSDL - Perl module for SOAP with WSDL support

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1418310

Andrew Bauer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #12 from Andrew Bauer  ---
Understood. Rebuttal accepted.

Latest srpm builds in rawhide:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17656611

Package approved.


Feel free to add my fas account, kni, as a co-maintainer if you are willing.

Thank you for your help getting these dependencies into Fedora. I can finally
see the light at the end of the tunnel.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1416455] Review Request: python-easywatch - super simple directory monitoring

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1416455

Athos Ribeiro  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||athoscribe...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|athoscribe...@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 1417392] Review Request: python-semver - Python helper for Semantic Versioning

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417392

Athos Ribeiro  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Athos Ribeiro  ---
Hi Igor,

I really like this SPEC file. Since it's a simple python package, maybe it
could be included as an example in the python packaging guidelines.

Version 2.7.5 is out, so it may be a good idea to update before uploading. Of
course I will not block the review.

Package looks good. Approved.


Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable
= 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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[!]: 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 all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds 

[Bug 1417392] Review Request: python-semver - Python helper for Semantic Versioning

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417392

Athos Ribeiro  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||athoscribe...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|athoscribe...@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 1420090] Review Request: marble-subsurface - Marble Subsurface branch

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420090

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||projects...@smart.ms
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|projects...@smart.ms
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #2 from Raphael Groner  ---
Taken. :)

Could you look into bug #1402590 for a review swap?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420100] Review Request: perl-Mail-Transport - Email message exchange code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420100

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1420099




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420099
[Bug 1420099] Review Request: perl-Mail-Message
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420099] Review Request: perl-Mail-Message

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420099

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1420100




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420100
[Bug 1420100] Review Request: perl-Mail-Transport - Email message exchange
code
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420100] New: Review Request: perl-Mail-Transport - Email message exchange code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420100

Bug ID: 1420100
   Summary: Review Request: perl-Mail-Transport - Email message
exchange code
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: tcall...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/perl-Mail-Transport.spec
SRPM URL:
https://spot.fedorapeople.org/perl-Mail-Transport-3.000-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Email message exchange code, formerly part of the Mail::Box
package.
Fedora Account System Username: spot

Note: This component used to be part of perl-Mail-Box, but was split off in
3.000.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420099] New: Review Request: perl-Mail-Message

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420099

Bug ID: 1420099
   Summary: Review Request: perl-Mail-Message
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: tcall...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/perl-Mail-Message.spec
SRPM URL: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/perl-Mail-Message-3.000-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: MIME message handling code, formerly part of the Mail::Box
package.
Fedora Account System Username: spot

Note: This component used to be part of perl-Mail-Box, but was split off in
3.000.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420087] Review Request: libdivecomputer-subsurface - Library for communication with dive computers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420087

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||projects...@smart.ms
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|projects...@smart.ms
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #3 from Raphael Groner  ---
Taken. :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1385856] Review Request: log4shib - C++ logging library for Shibboleth (OpenSAML)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385856



--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/log4shib

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1418310] Review Request: perl-SOAP-WSDL - Perl module for SOAP with WSDL support

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1418310



--- Comment #11 from Damian Wrobel  ---
(In reply to Andrew Bauer from comment #10)
> rpmlint reports some issues:
> 
> perl-SOAP-WSDL.noarch: W: no-documentation
> perl-SOAP-WSDL.noarch: E: zero-length
> /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/SOAP/WSDL/Generator/Template/XSD/complexType/
> POD/content_model.tt
> perl-SOAP-WSDL.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary wsdl2perl.pl
> perl-SOAP-WSDL-Apache.noarch: W: no-documentation
> perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> /usr/share/doc/perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc/example/java/cxf/.classpath
> perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> /usr/share/doc/perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc/example/java/cxf/.settings
> perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> /usr/share/doc/perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc/example/java/cxf/.settings
> 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.
> 
> These look fixable.
> 
> hidden-file-or-dir
> In %prep, compress the example folder into a .gz and then add that single
> file to %doc.
> If you need an example, look at the sed package srpm.
I don't see anything wrong having a file which I can directly load into Eclipse
without any extra steps. FYI in my F25 I have 62 such a files:

# find /usr -name '\.*' | wc -l
62

> 
> no-documentation
> Even though we have a dedicated "doc" subpackage, rpmlint still wants us to
> have a %doc in the other subpackages.
> From looking at a few other example specfiles, lets include the README and
> license in each subpackage.
License is already in all subpackages, I've just moved: Changes, HACKING,
README and TODO to the main package.

> 
> no-manual-page-for-binary
> The man page for wsdl2perl gets auto-magically created from the pod text
> during the build:
> Installing
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-SOAP-WSDL-3.003-2.fc26.noarch/usr/share/man/
> man1/wsdl2perl.pl.1
> 
> So we just need to pick up this file in %files e.g. 
> %{_mandir}/man1/wsdl2perl.pl.1
> 
It was already there, but in the -doc subpackage which seemed to be misleading
for rpmlint, thus I've moved all (two) manpages to main package and rename -doc
to -examples as it no longer contains documentation.

> zero-length
> I admit this is a bit picky, but let's insert the string "# No documentation

To me it's purely false positive, in my F25 system I see hundreds similar
cases, mostly: __init__.py

# find /usr -size 0 | wc -l
150

> generated for content_model yet" into content_model.tt.
> 
> This appears to be what has been done to a couple other files in this
> package:
> https://github.com/scrottie/SOAP-WSDL/tree/master/lib/SOAP/WSDL/Generator/
> Template/XSD/complexType/POD/simpleContent

Changelog:
- Move man pages, Changes, HACKING, README and TODO to main package,
- Rename subpackage -doc to -examples

Apart from above cosmetic changes, I would prefer not to change other things
unless someone has strong argument to do so.

Updated spec & srpm:

Spec URL:
https://dwrobel.fedorapeople.org/projects/rpmbuild/SPECS/perl-SOAP-WSDL.spec
SRPM URL:
https://dwrobel.fedorapeople.org/projects/rpmbuild/SRPMS/perl-SOAP-WSDL-3.003-4.fc25.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1420087] Review Request: libdivecomputer-subsurface - Library for communication with dive computers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420087



--- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter  ---
Also hosted @ copr,
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pingou/subsurface/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420090] Review Request: marble-subsurface - Marble Subsurface branch

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420090



--- Comment #1 from Rex Dieter  ---
Scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17653852

Also hosted @ copr,
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pingou/subsurface/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420090] Review Request: marble-subsurface - Marble Subsurface branch

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420090

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1271883
  Alias||marble-subsurface




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271883
[Bug 1271883] subsurface-4.6.0 is available
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1420090] New: Review Request: marble-subsurface - Marble Subsurface branch

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420090

Bug ID: 1420090
   Summary: Review Request: marble-subsurface - Marble Subsurface
branch
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rdie...@math.unl.edu
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/subsurface/marble-subsurface.spec
SRPM URL:
https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/subsurface/marble-subsurface-4.6.0-1.fc25.src.rpm
Description: A modified version of marble for Subsurface.
Fedora Account System Username: rdieter

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420087] Review Request: libdivecomputer-subsurface - Library for communication with dive computers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420087



--- Comment #1 from Rex Dieter  ---
Scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17654300

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420087] Review Request: libdivecomputer-subsurface - Library for communication with dive computers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420087

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1271883
  Alias||libdivecomputer-subsurface




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271883
[Bug 1271883] subsurface-4.6.0 is available
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1420087] New: Review Request: libdivecomputer-subsurface - Library for communication with dive computers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420087

Bug ID: 1420087
   Summary: Review Request: libdivecomputer-subsurface - Library
for communication with dive computers
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rdie...@math.unl.edu
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/subsurface/libdivecomputer-subsurface.spec
SRPM URL:
https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/subsurface/libdivecomputer-subsurface-4.6.0-1.fc25.src.rpm
Description: Libdivecomputer is a cross-platform and open source library for
communication with dive computers from various manufacturers.
Fedora Account System Username: rdieter

This version of libdivecomputer is a statically-built fork hosted by
subsurface, primarily for use in subsurface packaging.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1327635] Review Request: openstack-congress - OpenStack Congress Service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327635



--- Comment #15 from Javier Peña  ---
Updated files:

- Spec:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rdo-packages/congress-distgit/rpm-master/openstack-congress.spec
- SRPM:
http://46.231.132.68:8080/v1/AUTH_b50e80d3969f441a8b7b1fe831003e0a/rdoartifacts/19/4919/1/gate/DLRN-rpmbuild/Ze0ae6236ab8c486e96c3212c0ecaeaee/artifacts/centos/repos/54/92/54926c44114800c0112099d57e04f209191737ba_dev/openstack-congress-5.0.0-0.20170207164344.54926c4.el7.centos.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1132661] Review Request: atom - Atom editor from github

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1132661

Alick Zhao  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||alick9...@gmail.com
  Flags||needinfo?(sensor.wen@gmail.
   ||com)



--- Comment #30 from Alick Zhao  ---
Hi sensor.wen (aka 1dot75cm, mosquito),

What's the current status of your atom packaging? Do you think it is ready for
review?

I guess you need to turn the 'sed' lines into a separate patch.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1415331] Review Request: python-enjarify - Translate Dalvik bytecode to equivalent Java bytecode

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1415331

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||projects...@smart.ms
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|projects...@smart.ms
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Raphael Groner  ---
Taken. Thanks for looking into bug #1385856. :)

Some general hints before I'll run official fedora-review:

- Please try to send your patches to upstream: manpage, install and start
script.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment

- Why does upstream not provide a build/install environment? A proper build
script can avoid confusion about right build flags. Maybe we can suggest
setuptools.
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Byte_compiling

- The sitelib folder should be in a separate subpackage python3-enjarify with
support for the virtual provides of python-enjarify.
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#The_.25python_provide_macro

- Manpage is special documentation without the need to be marked with %doc.
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Manpages

- Please use also install -p for the manpage to preserve original timestamp.
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-IO-Socket-Multicast-1.12-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-b38ceab340

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-IO-Socket-Multicast-1.12-2.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-b9913738d7

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-IO-Socket-Multicast-1.12-2.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
EPEL 6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-2cda8d0e61

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316

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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-IO-Socket-Multicast-1.12-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-30fc6be997

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1374510] Review Request: lv2-ir-plugins - LV2 Plugin: low-latency, realtime, high performance signal convolver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1374510

Guido Aulisi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2017-02-07 12:41:06



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419715] Review Request: chrome-token-signing - enable digital signature for Chrome and Firefox > 52

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419715



--- Comment #3 from Mihkel Vain  ---
Just got an e-mail from upstream developer. They will plan to re-name that repo
in following days. I will notify here what they decide and most likely use that
name for fedora package as well.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1385856] Review Request: log4shib - C++ logging library for Shibboleth (OpenSAML)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385856

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zbys...@in.waw.pl
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
I don't get this insistence on substituting all occurrences of the name with
%name. For example, if I want to open the URL field in browser, c is not
enough, I need to manually replace %name. IMHO, such changes are a cargo-cult.
Just saying.

Suggestions:
make %{?_smp_mflags} → %make_build
make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} → %make_install

+ package name is OK
+ license is acceptable (LGPv2+)
+ builds and installs OK
+ provides/requires/buildrequires look correct
+ scriptlets are sane
+ fedora-review doesn't point out any issues

Package is APPROVED.

rpmlint:
log4shib.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/liblog4shib.so.1.0.9
pthread_key_create
log4shib.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/liblog4shib.so.1.0.9
pthread_getspecific
log4shib.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/liblog4shib.so.1.0.9
pthread_key_delete
log4shib.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/liblog4shib.so.1.0.9
pthread_setspecific
I think that's related to the recent glibc changes, not a problem with this
package.

log4shib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/liblog4shib.so.1.0.9 /lib64/libnsl.so.1
log4shib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/liblog4shib.so.1.0.9 /lib64/libm.so.6
Both of those libraries are provided by glibc, so this extra dep is harmless.

log4shib.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/log4shib/THANKS
log4shib.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/log4shib/COPYING
Like Vasiliy said, you might want to fix those, or maybe notify upstream.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1385856] Review Request: log4shib - C++ logging library for Shibboleth (OpenSAML)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385856



--- Comment #8 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
If you still want to do the swap review, #1415331 is nice an simple.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1385856] Review Request: log4shib - C++ logging library for Shibboleth (OpenSAML)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385856



--- Comment #7 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
NEWS is useless, can be dropped from %doc.

There are some tests in tests/. Would be nice to add a %check section.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419942] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Thin - Thin Wrapper around HTTP:: Tiny to play nice with HTTP::Message

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419942



--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-HTTP-Thin

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420021] New: Review Request: gtts - Create an mp3 file from spoken text via the Google TTS API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420021

Bug ID: 1420021
   Summary: Review Request: gtts - Create an mp3 file from spoken
text via the Google TTS API
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: pbrobin...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Blocks: 1269538 (IoT)



SPEC: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/gtts-token.spec
SRPM: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/gtts-token-1.1.1-1.fc25.src.rpm

description:
gTTS-token (Google Text to Speech token): A python implementation of the token 
validation of Google Translate

koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17651624


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269538
[Bug 1269538] Tracker for IoT on Fedora
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1420021] Review Request: gtts-token - Calculates a token to run the Google Translate text to speech

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420021

Peter Robinson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: gtts -  |Review Request: gtts-token
   |Create an mp3 file from |- Calculates a token to run
   |spoken text via the Google  |the Google Translate text
   |TTS API |to speech



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1420021] Review Request: gtts - Create an mp3 file from spoken text via the Google TTS API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420021

Paul Whalen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pwha...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pwha...@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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419942] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Thin - Thin Wrapper around HTTP:: Tiny to play nice with HTTP::Message

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419942

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
URL and Source0 addresses are Ok.
Source archive (SHA-256:
c4a78588c194603222b0a6b426e61692189def0ce4a0581791873b8720f79e9e) is original.
Ok.
Summary verified from lib/HTTP/Thin.pm. Ok.
Description verified from lib/HTTP/Thin.pm. Ok.
License verified from README, LICENSE, lib/HTTP/Thin.pm. Ok.
No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok.
Build dependencies are Ok.
All tests pass. Ok.

$ rpmlint perl-HTTP-Thin.spec ../SRPMS/perl-HTTP-Thin-0.006-1.fc26.src.rpm
../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-Thin-0.006-1.fc26.noarch.rpm 
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint is Ok.

$ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-Thin-0.006-1.fc26.noarch.rpm 
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Feb  7 16:04
/usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-Thin
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 3494 Apr 21  2014
/usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-Thin/CHANGES
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot  399 Apr 21  2014
/usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-Thin/README
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Feb  7 16:04
/usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-Thin/ex
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot  157 Feb  7 16:04
/usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-Thin/ex/simple.pl
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Feb  7 16:04
/usr/share/licenses/perl-HTTP-Thin
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot18352 Apr 21  2014
/usr/share/licenses/perl-HTTP-Thin/LICENSE
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1943 Feb  7 16:04
/usr/share/man/man3/HTTP::Thin.3pm.gz
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Feb  7 16:04
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/HTTP
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2884 Apr 21  2014
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/HTTP/Thin.pm
Files layout and permissions are Ok.

$ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-Thin-0.006-1.fc26.noarch.rpm |
sort -f | uniq -c
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1)
  1 perl(Class::Method::Modifiers)
  1 perl(Hash::MultiValue)
  1 perl(HTTP::Response)
  1 perl(HTTP::Tiny)
  1 perl(parent)
  1 perl(Safe::Isa)
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Binary requires are Ok.

$ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-Thin-0.006-1.fc26.noarch.rpm |
sort -k2
perl(HTTP::Thin) = 0.006
perl-HTTP-Thin = 0.006-1.fc26
Binary provides are Ok.

$ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-Thin-0.006-1.fc26.noarch.rpm 
Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok.

Package builds in F26
(https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17651008). Ok.

Package is in line with Fedora and Perl packaging guidelines.
Resolution: Package APPROVED.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327635] Review Request: openstack-congress - OpenStack Congress Service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327635

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(dra...@redhat.com |
   |)   |



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327635] Review Request: openstack-congress - OpenStack Congress Service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327635



--- Comment #14 from Javier Peña  ---
Spec file reviewed in Gerrit:

- Spec:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rdo-packages/congress-distgit/rpm-master/openstack-congress.spec
- SRPM:
http://46.231.132.68:8080/v1/AUTH_b50e80d3969f441a8b7b1fe831003e0a/rdoartifacts/87/4487/18/gate/DLRN-rpmbuild/Z4d6981303c434c9fac204f8130ce2b67/artifacts/centos/repos/54/92/54926c44114800c0112099d57e04f209191737ba_dev/openstack-congress-5.0.0-0.20170207085032.54926c4.el7.centos.src.rpm

Remember that the SRPM has been generated by DLRN, so some differences in the
spec are expected when running fedora-review.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419942] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Thin - Thin Wrapper around HTTP:: Tiny to play nice with HTTP::Message

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419942

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1418310] Review Request: perl-SOAP-WSDL - Perl module for SOAP with WSDL support

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1418310



--- Comment #10 from Andrew Bauer  ---
rpmlint reports some issues:

perl-SOAP-WSDL.noarch: W: no-documentation
perl-SOAP-WSDL.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/SOAP/WSDL/Generator/Template/XSD/complexType/POD/content_model.tt
perl-SOAP-WSDL.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary wsdl2perl.pl
perl-SOAP-WSDL-Apache.noarch: W: no-documentation
perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc/example/java/cxf/.classpath
perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc/example/java/cxf/.settings
perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/perl-SOAP-WSDL-doc/example/java/cxf/.settings
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.

These look fixable.

hidden-file-or-dir
In %prep, compress the example folder into a .gz and then add that single file
to %doc.
If you need an example, look at the sed package srpm.

no-documentation
Even though we have a dedicated "doc" subpackage, rpmlint still wants us to
have a %doc in the other subpackages.
From looking at a few other example specfiles, lets include the README and
license in each subpackage.

no-manual-page-for-binary
The man page for wsdl2perl gets auto-magically created from the pod text during
the build:
Installing
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-SOAP-WSDL-3.003-2.fc26.noarch/usr/share/man/man1/wsdl2perl.pl.1

So we just need to pick up this file in %files e.g. 
%{_mandir}/man1/wsdl2perl.pl.1

zero-length
I admit this is a bit picky, but let's insert the string "# No documentation
generated for content_model yet" into content_model.tt.

This appears to be what has been done to a couple other files in this package:
https://github.com/scrottie/SOAP-WSDL/tree/master/lib/SOAP/WSDL/Generator/Template/XSD/complexType/POD/simpleContent

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1379651] Review Request: python-feedgenerator - Standalone version of Django' s feedgenerator module

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379651



--- Comment #14 from Adam Williamson  ---
The pelican package explicitly requires a module called 'feedgenerator' now, so
either that needs patching or this needs packaging.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1379651] Review Request: python-feedgenerator - Standalone version of Django' s feedgenerator module

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379651

Adam Williamson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1379149




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379149
[Bug 1379149] Pelican requires missing feedgenerator module
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419262] Review Request: switchboard-plug-mouse-touchpad - Switchboard Mouse and Touchpad plug

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419262

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419262] Review Request: switchboard-plug-mouse-touchpad - Switchboard Mouse and Touchpad plug

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419262



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
switchboard-plug-mouse-touchpad-0.1.2-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a832e9a134

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419942] New: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Thin - Thin Wrapper around HTTP::Tiny to play nice with HTTP:: Message

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419942

Bug ID: 1419942
   Summary: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Thin - Thin Wrapper around
HTTP::Tiny to play nice with HTTP::Message
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jples...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://jplesnik.fedorapeople.org/perl-HTTP-Thin/perl-HTTP-Thin.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jplesnik.fedorapeople.org/perl-HTTP-Thin/perl-HTTP-Thin-0.006-1.fc26.src.rpm

Description:
HTTP::Thin is a thin wrapper around HTTP::Tiny adding the ability to pass
in HTTP::Request objects and get back HTTP::Response objects.

Fedora Account System Username: jples...@redhat.com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316



--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-IO-Socket-Multicast

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1411467] Review Request: bitlbee-steam - Steam protocol plugin for BitlBee

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1411467



--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/bitlbee-steam

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419937] New: Review Request: pgdbf - Convert XBase / FoxPro databases to PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419937

Bug ID: 1419937
   Summary: Review Request: pgdbf - Convert XBase / FoxPro
databases to PostgreSQL
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: pa...@hubbitus.info
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Hubbitus/rpm-pgdbf/master/pgdbf.spec
SRPM URL: http://rpm.hubbitus.info/Fedora25/pgdbf/pgdbf-0.6.2-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description:
PgDBF is a program for converting XBase databases - particularly FoxPro tables
with memo files - into a format that PostgreSQL can directly import. It's a
compact C project with no dependencies other than standard Unix libraries.

While the project is relatively tiny and simple, it's also heavily optimized
via profiling - routine benchmark were many times faster than with other Open
Source programs. In fact, even on slower systems, conversions are typically
limited by hard drive speed.

Fedora Account System Username: Hubbitus
Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17649728

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1281764] Fedora - Review Request: genwqe-tools - GenWQE userspace tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1281764

Tomas Pelka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Group|qa  |



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394193] Review Request: arduino-builder - A command line tool for compiling Arduino sketches

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394193



--- Comment #11 from Petr Viktorin  ---
... But that's not necessary now, since after a week arduino-builder can be
pushed to stable.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1385856] Review Request: log4shib - C++ logging library for Shibboleth (OpenSAML)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385856

Vasiliy Glazov  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||vasc...@gmail.com



--- Comment #5 from Vasiliy Glazov  ---
Please correct rpmlint error and warning:
log4shib.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/log4shib/COPYING
log4shib.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/log4shib/THANKS

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419043] Review Request: perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical - Export lexically-available subs with Sub:: Exporter

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419043



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Source file is ok
Summary is ok
License is ok
Description is ok
URL and Source0 are ok
All tests passed

$ rpm -qp --provides perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical-0.092292-1.fc26.noarch.rpm |
sort | uniq -c
  1 perl(Sub::Exporter::Lexical) = 0.092292
  1 perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical = 0.092292-1.fc26
Binary provides are Ok.

$ rpmlint ./perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical*
 perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lexically
-> lexical, exotically, allergically
 perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lexically ->
lexical, exotically, allergically
 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Rpmlint is ok

BuildRequires
FIX: Please remove duplicity 'perl(strict)' in BR.
FIX: Please change the version restriction for perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) to
 6.76 or higher, because NO_PACKLIST option (spec file line 37) was
 added in this version.

$ rpm -qplv perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical-0.092292-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot 0 Feb  7 10:35
/usr/share/doc/perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot   290 Nov 24  2013
/usr/share/doc/perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical/Changes
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot   332 Nov 24  2013
/usr/share/doc/perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical/README
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot 0 Feb  7 10:35
/usr/share/licenses/perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 18353 Nov 24  2013
/usr/share/licenses/perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical/LICENSE
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot  2472 Feb  7 10:35
/usr/share/man/man3/Sub::Exporter::Lexical.3pm.gz
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot 0 Feb  7 10:35
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Sub
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot 0 Feb  7 10:35
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Sub/Exporter
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot  4118 Nov 24  2013
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Sub/Exporter/Lexical.pm
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot   779 Nov 24  2013
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Sub/Exporter/snippet.pl

$ rpm -qp --requires perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical-0.092292-1.fc26.noarch.rpm |
sort | uniq -c
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1)
  1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.12.0
  1 perl(Lexical::Sub)
  1 perl(Sub::Exporter)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Binary requires are not Ok.

FIX: Do you want to distribute the file 'snippet.pl'? It was put into
 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Sub/Exporter. The dependencies for the file
 are not generated, because 'file' detects it as 'ASCII text' and rpm-build 
 does not process it by perl-generators.

$ file Sub-Exporter-Lexical-0.092292/snippet.pl
Sub-Exporter-Lexical-0.092292/snippet.pl: ASCII text

 The missing run-require dependencies for 'snippet.pl' are:
   perl(B::Hooks::EndOfScope)
   perl(Carp)
   perl(Sub::Install)
   perl(namespace::autoclean)
   perl(namespace::clean)


Please correct 'FIX' issues and provide new spec file.

Otherwise the package looks good.
Not approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419122] Review Request: rubygem-base32 - Ruby extension for base32 encoding and decoding

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419122



--- Comment #16 from Marcel Haerry  ---
Done, so the %gem_install part is the only open part.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419331] Review Request: switchboard-plug-keyboard - Switchboard Keyboard plug

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419331

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419331] Review Request: switchboard-plug-keyboard - Switchboard Keyboard plug

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419331



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
switchboard-plug-keyboard-0.3.2-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-f4cf6bf8cc

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 821406] Review Request: eiskaltdcpp - QT Direct Connect client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821406



--- Comment #32 from Vasiliy Glazov  ---
Spec URL:
https://raw.github.com/RussianFedora/eiskaltdcpp/master/eiskaltdcpp.spec
SRPM URL:
http://koji.russianfedora.pro/kojifiles/packages/eiskaltdcpp/2.2.11/0.20161119git0fa9a73.fc26/src/eiskaltdcpp-2.2.11-0.20161119git0fa9a73.fc26.src.rpm

Added support for openssl 1.1.0.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1391457] Review Request: python-netjsonconfig - PaNetwork configuration management library based on NetJSON DeviceConfiguration

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1391457



--- Comment #15 from Germano Massullo  ---
https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/python-netjsonconfig/python-netjsonconfig.spec

https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/python-netjsonconfig/python-netjsonconfig-0.5.3-1.fc25.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1132661] Review Request: atom - Atom editor from github

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1132661

Helber Maciel Guerra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(helbe...@gmail.co |
   |m)  |



--- Comment #29 from Helber Maciel Guerra  ---
Long time ago, the fedora FZUG group ask me to continue this job.

This os copr:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mosquito/atom/

Atom files:
https://github.com/1dot75cm/repo/tree/master/rpms/atom

The spec is:
https://github.com/1dot75cm/repo/blob/master/rpms/atom/atom.spec

The maintainer split this package on atom, electron, electron-legacy and
nodejs-atom-package-manager. Based on my suggestion.

This package is very is not easy to create, and be accepted. As
sensor@gmail.com mention here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1132661#c21

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419043] Review Request: perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical - Export lexically-available subs with Sub:: Exporter

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419043

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jples...@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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419122] Review Request: rubygem-base32 - Ruby extension for base32 encoding and decoding

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419122



--- Comment #15 from Sascha Spreitzer  ---
(In reply to Marcel Haerry from comment #14)
> Oh that's good to know. I already wondered why gem2rpm would create an
> invalid specfile. But given that background, I understand it that
> fedora-review is wrong here and I can revert the commit. Fine?

Yes, that is 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419122] Review Request: rubygem-base32 - Ruby extension for base32 encoding and decoding

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419122



--- Comment #14 from Marcel Haerry  ---
(In reply to Simone Caronni from comment #11)
> (In reply to Sascha Spreitzer from comment #8)
> > Must:
> > ! license file in all packages
> 
> Actually you need to make sure that the license is available in any package
> installation combination. So judging by a quick look from the spec file, the
> -doc subpackage requires the main package to be installed, so the license is
> enough to be available in the main package as it is always installed when
> -doc is.


Oh that's good to know. I already wondered why gem2rpm would create an invalid
specfile. But given that background, I understand it that fedora-review is
wrong here and I can revert the commit. 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1097246] Update to version 3.x [was: Review Request: python-celery3 - Distributed Task Queue]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097246

Matthias Runge  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|package-review@lists.fedora |
   |project.org |



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1417316] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-Multicast - Perl library for sending and receiving multicast messages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417316

Damian Wrobel  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dwro...@ertelnet.rybnik.pl
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #5 from Damian Wrobel  ---
(In reply to Andrew Bauer from comment #4)
> Can you try to set fedora-review back to "?" , save it, set it back to "+"
> and then save again?  I'm not sure what else to do.
I set it back to "+".

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419122] Review Request: rubygem-base32 - Ruby extension for base32 encoding and decoding

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419122



--- Comment #13 from Sascha Spreitzer  ---
Hi Marcel

(In reply to Marcel Haerry from comment #9)
> gem_install:
> 
> I don't really understand the problem with %gem_install, as I am using it:
> 
> http://git.scrit.ch/srpm/rubygem-base32/tree/SPECS/rubygem-base32.spec#n46
> 
> AND I think I closely follow the guidelines in the wiki
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#.25build
> 
> Is the review test broken here? Can you otherwise be more specific?

The fedora-review tool is highlighting the %gem_install being missed, but i can
see it in the spec file. And additionally there is an %install section.
Please give me some time to find out why fedora-review is failing and if
%install in addition to %gem_install is permissible.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419122] Review Request: rubygem-base32 - Ruby extension for base32 encoding and decoding

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419122



--- Comment #12 from Sascha Spreitzer  ---
Hi Simone

> fedora-review is "smart enough" to actually get the links in the last comment 
> in which they are available, you don't need to make sure they are in the last 
> comment before the actual fedora-review process.

I had to add the link as fedora-review could not extract the raw/plain version
from the provided link.

> Actually you need to make sure that the license is available in any package 
> installation combination. So judging by a quick look from the spec file, the 
> -doc subpackage requires the main package to be installed, so the license is 
> enough to be available in the main package as it is always installed when 
> -doc 
> is.

Sounds good to me then.

> PS: I'm not watching you, but when you sponsor someone you are notified of 
> the 
> Bugzilla actions of the person you've sponsored :P

All input that makes Fedora a good Linux distribution is very welcome!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1419122] Review Request: rubygem-base32 - Ruby extension for base32 encoding and decoding

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419122

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||negativ...@gmail.com



--- Comment #11 from Simone Caronni  ---
Hi Sasha,

just a couple of notes.

(In reply to Sascha Spreitzer from comment #3)
> As I am using fedora-review it is better I am pasting the plain/raw link
> version of the spec link here for automatic processing.
> 
> Spec URL:
> http://git.scrit.ch/srpm/rubygem-base32/plain/SPECS/rubygem-base32.spec
> SRPM URL:
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/380/17570380/rubygem-base32-0.
> 3.2-1.fc26.src.rpm

fedora-review is "smart enough" to actually get the links in the last comment
in which they are available, you don't need to make sure they are in the last
comment before the actual fedora-review process.

(In reply to Sascha Spreitzer from comment #8)
> Must:
> ! license file in all packages

Actually you need to make sure that the license is available in any package
installation combination. So judging by a quick look from the spec file, the
-doc subpackage requires the main package to be installed, so the license is
enough to be available in the main package as it is always installed when -doc
is.

PS: I'm not watching you, but when you sponsor someone you are notified of the
Bugzilla actions of the person you've sponsored :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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1403600] Review Request: YafaRay - A free open-source raytracing render engine

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1403600

Simone Caronni  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||negativ...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|negativ...@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 1087017] Review Request: screen-message - Displays a short text fullscreen

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1087017

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Blocks||201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW)
 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Last Closed||2017-02-07 03:11:14



--- Comment #8 from Raphael Groner  ---
(In reply to Leon Weber from comment #7)
…
> > Are you still interested in this package?
> 
> Not really, no.

Okay, so closing here. Please feel free to reopen if you're still interested to
continue or start another review request.


Referenced Bugs:

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

[Bug 1419657] Review Request: rubygem-hashdiff - HashDiff is a diff lib to compute the smallest difference between two hashes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419657

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||rubygem-hashdiff-0.3.2-1.fc
   ||26
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-02-07 03:09:59



--- Comment #3 from Vít Ondruch  ---
Thx 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org