[Bug 1028743] Review Request: hans - IP over ICMP tunneling solution

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028743

Michal Ambroz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #18 from Michal Ambroz  ---
Hello Pavel,
perfect - tested the package and it won't start if password was not changed.
Good.

Please there are some minor typos in the changelog.


Other than that - free to go.
Michal Ambroz

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1450440] Review Request: perl-Ref-Util-XS - Utility functions for checking references

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1450440



--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Ref-Util-0.203-1.el7, perl-Ref-Util-XS-0.116-2.el7 has been pushed to the
Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of
it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 812758] Review Request: trader - Star Traders, a simple game of interstellar trading

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812758



--- Comment #43 from Fedora Update System  ---
trader-7.10-2.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-1e4cce6a22

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 812758] Review Request: trader - Star Traders, a simple game of interstellar trading

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812758

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 812758] Review Request: trader - Star Traders, a simple game of interstellar trading

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812758



--- Comment #42 from Fedora Update System  ---
trader-7.10-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-132cea1f3a

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 812758] Review Request: trader - Star Traders, a simple game of interstellar trading

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812758



--- Comment #41 from Fedora Update System  ---
trader-7.10-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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-2017-59d8832418

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 812758] Review Request: trader - Star Traders, a simple game of interstellar trading

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812758



--- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System  ---
trader-7.10-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-697e3c9cea

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 812758] Review Request: trader - Star Traders, a simple game of interstellar trading

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812758

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System  ---
trader-7.10-2.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-2017-2d2cc6027d

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1432076] Review Request: urh - Universal Radio Hacker: investigate wireless protocols like a boss

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1432076



--- Comment #3 from Arthur Mello  ---

Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: urh : /usr/lib64/python3.5/site-
  packages/urh/dev/native/includes/libhackrf/hackrf.h urh :
  /usr/lib64/python3.5/site-packages/urh/dev/native/includes/rtl-sdr.h urh
  : /usr/lib64/python3.5/site-packages/urh/dev/native/includes/rtl-
  sdr_export.h
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc-c++
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. 
 /*
  * Unversioned so-files generated via CPython.
  /
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[!]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
 /*
  * Legal section mentions that if src contains generated code, original
  * source files from which it was generated must be added. Some binaries
  * presented on src are deleted during %prep but data/hacker.prof is still
  * present. It is not clear if such file is necessary to build package and
  * how it is generated.
  /
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Apache (v2.0)", "BSD (3 clause)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL
 (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 351 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck attached:
 /*
  * Following documentation under Fedora Licensing, ASL 2.0 (pkg license)
  * it is not compatible with GPL v2. Package contains GPL v2 or later 
  * license in some files. It is not clear for me if ASL is compatible with
  * such scenario, so please ignore this if it was. 
  /
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[!] : Sources contain only permissible code or content.
 /*
  * Doubts about hacker.proof file
  /
[!]: Development files must be in a -devel package
 /*
  * Again CPython files, not sure if we are able to remove those or no
  /
[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.
[x]: 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]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
 contains icons.
 Note: icons in urh
[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.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package 

[Bug 1432076] Review Request: urh - Universal Radio Hacker: investigate wireless protocols like a boss

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1432076

Arthur Mello  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ame...@redhat.com
   Assignee|pcah...@redhat.com  |ame...@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 1433749] Review Request: vrms-rpm - report of installed nonfree software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433749



--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System  ---
vrms-rpm-1.2-2.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 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
hardening-wrapper-2.6-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-d40c1879cb

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
hardening-wrapper-2.6-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-fbbabb383f

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
hardening-wrapper-2.6-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-f398039c92

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
hardening-wrapper-2.6-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-b410819218

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
hardening-wrapper-2.5-6.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-9dda465472

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1433749] Review Request: vrms-rpm - report of installed nonfree software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433749



--- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System  ---
vrms-rpm-1.2-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 1431868] Review Request: syncthing-inotify - Syncthing File watcher

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431868



--- Comment #1 from Fabio Valentini  ---
Updated .spec and SRPM files for the newest 0.8.6 upstream release:

Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing-inotify.spec

SRPM URL:
https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing-inotify-0.8.6-1.fc26.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 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #14 from Fabio Valentini  ---
Updated .spec and SRPM files for the newest 0.14.30 upstream release:

Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing.spec

SRPM URL:
https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing-0.14.30-1.fc26.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 1461769] Review Request: module-macros - provides macros for module development

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461769

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 1461769] Review Request: module-macros - provides macros for module development

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461769



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
module-macros-0.1-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-00037c7e84

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1461769] Review Request: module-macros - provides macros for module development

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461769



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
module-macros-0.1-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-800c975894

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1451407] Review Request: annobin - a gcc plugin to record extra information in compiled files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1451407

Nick Clifton  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton  ---
Sorry - bad permissions on the file.  Now fixed.

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

[Bug 1408477] Review Request: crconf - Linux crypto layer configuraton tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1408477

Paul Wouters  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2017-06-16 10:31:24



--- Comment #2 from Paul Wouters  ---
This tool turns out to not work well at all, so I decided not to seek inclusion
into 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 1435876] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - Pickled object field for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876



--- Comment #4 from Aurelien Bompard  ---
Sorry, wrong SRPM URL.

Spec URL:
https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-django-picklefield/python-django-picklefield.spec
SRPM URL:
https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-django-picklefield/python-django-picklefield-0.3.2-1.el7.centos.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 1435876] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - Pickled object field for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876



--- Comment #3 from Aurelien Bompard  ---
The python-django package has been fixed in Rawhide only, so I'll just add pytz
in the dependencies for now.

Spec URL:
https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-django-picklefield/python-django-picklefield.spec
SRPM URL:
https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python-django-picklefield/python-django-picklefield-0.3.2-1.fc27.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 1441813] Review Request: colorful - simple side-view shooter game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441813

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-06-16 09:17:10



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
colorful-1.2-11.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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 1451407] Review Request: annobin - a gcc plugin to record extra information in compiled files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1451407

Stephen Gallagher  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ni...@redhat.com
  Flags||needinfo?(ni...@redhat.com)



--- Comment #1 from Stephen Gallagher  ---
The SRPM link is a 403, so it cannot be reviewed. Please correct 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 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/hardening-wrapper

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1461769] Review Request: module-macros - provides macros for module development

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461769



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/module-macros

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1460934] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-tw-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Traditional Chinese

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1460934



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/adobe-source-han-serif-tw-fonts

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1460932] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-cn-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Simplified Chinese

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1460932



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/adobe-source-han-serif-cn-fonts

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1451407] Review Request: annobin - a gcc plugin to record extra information in compiled files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1451407

Stephen Gallagher  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||sgall...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sgall...@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 1455886] Review Request: nuvola-app-amazon-cloud-player - Amazon Cloud Player for Nuvola Player 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1455886



--- Comment #6 from mgans...@alice.de  ---
Spec URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/nuvola-app-amazon-cloud-player.spec
SRPM URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/nuvola-app-amazon-cloud-player-5.4-3.fc25.src.rpm

%changelog
* Fri Jun 16 2017 Martin Gansser  - 5.4-3
- remove Recommends: flash-plugin
- rename RR nuvolaplayer-devel to nuvolaruntime-devel

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

[Bug 1460317] Review Request: gnome-panel - GNOME Flashback panel

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1460317



--- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini  ---
That's why I wrote "where appropriate", because some of those points are only
my opinion on how the "best possible" .spec file would look like, and not
enforcible guidelines. However, I only pointed out things that make the current
.spec file prone to errors and/or hard to read by a human, and most of them are
(I think) reasonable suggestions or even necessary requirements for
improvements.

I admit that I am a bit pedantic when it comes to clarity and readability, so
if you object to specific points I made and provide reasoning for why you are
doing it the way it's done right now, I won't block the review on those points.

Also, it seems I forgot to add two things to my list above:
41) Use %global instead of %define.
42) Fix present bogus dates in the %changelog.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1450590] Review Request: watchman - a file watching service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1450590



--- Comment #10 from James Hogarth  ---
Apologies for the delays but I had some family issues that delayed responses.

Based on the discussions upstream, and the change in bundling policies in
recent times, I don't think this should be an actual blocker.

That being said the specific language in the guidelines appears ambiguous as
there is a clear NO STATIC WITHOUT EXCEPTION followed by "well, bundle if you
really have to".

They way we handle such a situation in Fedora to get clarification is via our
Fedora Packaging Committee (FPC).

The ticket has been opened for the clarification request here:

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/692

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST



--- Comment #2 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
Thank you for the review!

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

[Bug 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128

cl...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from cl...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.

 -> only empty, arched, main package is being renamed. The generated
(noarch) rpm has still the same name so no Obsoletes or Provides is required
here.

[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: 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]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources 

[Bug 1444428] Rename-Review Request: hardening-wrapper - Tool to check ELF for being built hardened

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=128

cl...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1435876] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - Pickled object field for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876
Bug 1435876 depends on bug 1458493, which changed state.

Bug 1458493 Summary: Django missing dependency on pytz
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1458493

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE



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