[Bug 1460630] Review Request: copr-rpmbuild - performs COPR builds
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1460630 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa --- Is there a reason you're not using the perl() Provides for the Requires of Perl modules? Those are preferred over using the Perl module package names, given the propensity for modules to move around... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433749 --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System --- vrms-rpm-1.2-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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 1433749] Review Request: vrms-rpm - report of installed nonfree software
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433749 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System --- vrms-rpm-1.2-2.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 1462983] Review Request: python-phonenumbers - A Python port of Google's libphonenumber
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462983 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-phonenumbers-8.5.2-1.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-2017-67f5adee78 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1441804] Review Request: kdb - Database Connectivity and Creation Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441804 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- kdb-3.0.1-1.fc26, kexi-3.0.1-2.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-2017-57ab847ef7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1441805] Review Request: kexi - An integrated environment for managing data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441805 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- kdb-3.0.1-1.fc26, kexi-3.0.1-2.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-2017-57ab847ef7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1462760] Review Request: gir-to-d - Tool to create D bindings from GObject introspection files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462760 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- gir-to-d-0.11.0-1.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-2017-0ef6519c65 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1451054] Review Request: python-terminaltables - Generate tables in terminals from list of strings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1451054 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-terminaltables -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1426972] Review Request: hugo - A Fast and Flexible Static Site Generator built with love in GoLang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1426972 --- Comment #10 from Athos Ribeiro --- Thanks Jan! New sources: Spec URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/hugo.spec SRPM URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/hugo-0.24-1.fc25.src.rpm There is a problem with toml files not being recognized. i18n package needs to be updated (I am the maintainer) but it requires a newer version of golang-github-pelletier-go-toml. I will ping Jan (go-toml maintainer) once again to ckeck if that is doable :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1307238] Review Request: gdouros-avdira-fonts - A font based on elements created by Demetrios Damilas (late 15th c.)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307238 --- Comment #20 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek --- Good call. I just checked, and gnome-software shows the font without trouble (although with a big "no screenshot provided" empty box, but that's a separate issue). > Just out of curiosity though, how would such a metapackage complicate things? > Wouldn't it work like the libreoffice metapackage which doesn't have to be > installed in order to get some features of the suite? It wouldn't. It's just yet another package that needs an occasional release and update, etc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1307238] Review Request: gdouros-avdira-fonts - A font based on elements created by Demetrios Damilas (late 15th c.)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307238 Alexander Ploumistos changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(hughsient@gmail.c | |om) | --- Comment #19 from Alexander Ploumistos --- A couple of days ago I noticed that the NEEDINFO flag has the review stuck as pending in pkgdb and that's triggering my OCD :P. Given that gnome-software, the AppStream specification and this package have all changed since this review, I'm clearing the needinfo request. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1432076 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- urh-1.6.6-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-2df06489c5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1432076 Jaroslav Škarvada changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2017-06-23 12:43:25 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1432076 --- Comment #7 from Gwyn Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/urh -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1452649] Review Request: python-exabgp - Package review request for ExaBGP spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1452649 --- Comment #25 from Thomas Mangin --- 4.0.1 was released today -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1462443] Review Request: libaec - Adaptive Entropy Coding library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462443 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 1462443] Review Request: libaec - Adaptive Entropy Coding library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462443 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- libaec-1.0.0-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-56ec5fb7e4 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1250025] Review Request: rocksdb - A Persistent Key-Value Store for Flash and RAM Storage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250025
--- Comment #6 from Augusto Caringi ---
The build time is unusual long given the size of the software... More than 6
minutes on my machine.
The cause is that the Makefile has a problem and as a consequence it doesn't
use parallel jobs in the building process (even with the proper utilization of
%{?_smp_mflags} in the spec file).
This problem is already fixed in the upstream master branch...
Here is the complete explanation:
"Previously, the shared library (make shared_lib) was built with only one
compile line, compiling all .cc files and linking the shared library in
one step. That step would often take 10+ minutes on one machine, and
could not take advantage of multiple CPUs (it's only one invocation of
the compiler). This commit changes the shared_lib build to compile .o files
individually (placing the resulting .o files in the directory
shared-objects) and then link them into the shared library at the end,
similarly to how the java static build (jls) does it."
https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/2165
Maybe would be a good idea to apply this patch downstream...
On my machine the building time was cut by more than half.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1438775] Review Request: cppcodec - Header-only C++11 library to encode/decode base64/base64url/ base32/base32hex/hex
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1438775 Jaroslav Škarvada changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jskar...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- (In reply to Jan Černý from comment #1) > Issues > -- > Debuginfo is missing without a justification. Explanation should be provided. The resulting RPM contains only header files, no binaries, so no debuginfo is created and it's OK. There are tools in the tool directory (e.g. base64dec) which are built, but aren't installed. This is probably not a blocker - there are more sophisticated replacement tools in 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 1464479] Review Request: casync - Content-Addressable Data Synchronization Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464479 --- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek --- If you want to be a comaintainer, that'd be great. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1464479] Review Request: casync - Content-Addressable Data Synchronization Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464479 James Hogarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2017-06-23 10:14:09 --- Comment #2 from James Hogarth --- oh it was already reviewed ... I missed that . lalala *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1463353 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1463353] Review Request: casync - Content Addressable Data Synchronizer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1463353 James Hogarth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||james.hoga...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from James Hogarth --- *** Bug 1464479 has been marked as a duplicate of 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 1464479] Review Request: casync - Content-Addressable Data Synchronization Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464479 --- Comment #1 from James Hogarth --- It was nice of zbyszek to put up the koji scratch build, but I'd like to see this in Fedora ASAP ... This spec file was written without any reference to the koji build as I was not sure what license that spec may have been under as it's obviously not an approved package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1460917] Review Request: rpkg - Command-line client tool to DistGit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1460917 --- Comment #10 from cl...@redhat.com --- > Would you prefer to provide new srpm and spec at public share after this fix? > Yes please. Spec URL: http://clime.cz/rpkg-client.spec SRPM URL: http://clime.cz/rpkg-client-0.2-1.git.2.1b40619.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 1464479] New: Review Request: casync - Content-Addressable Data Synchronization Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464479 Bug ID: 1464479 Summary: Review Request: casync - Content-Addressable Data Synchronization Tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: james.hoga...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~jhogarth/casync/casync.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~jhogarth/casync/casync-1-1.fc27.src.rpm Description: casync is a tool that allows efficient transfer of block and filesystems, particularly with a view to container and virtual machine images. It provides the ability to chunk a filesystem or block device with an index and then using a seed instance only transfer altered data to make delta updates simple without burden on the originating server. Fedora Account System Username: jhogarth -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1460630] Review Request: copr-rpmbuild - performs COPR builds
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1460630 --- Comment #7 from cl...@redhat.com --- Here is the latest version with the fix: Spec URL: http://clime.cz/copr-rpmbuild.spec SRPM URL: http://clime.cz/copr-rpmbuild-0.4-1.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 1250025] Review Request: rocksdb - A Persistent Key-Value Store for Flash and RAM Storage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250025 Augusto Caringi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||acari...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Augusto Caringi --- I don't know if is this a big problem, because the package is supposed to be included only in the upcoming F26 (F27?)... But I think that it's worthy to mention: The i686 build is not working in F25 (and just in F25). And it seems that it's not a problem in the package itself, but probably a bug in gcc. I've first tried a koji scratch build and after some time I realized that the i686 build was never finishing (I had to cancel the task - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20095030) Then I tried a local build using "mock -r fedora-25-i386" and the same happened... It seems that gcc enters in an infinite loop. For F26 and F27 the build works well for all supported architectures: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20114843 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20114856 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1428759] Review Request: dmtx-utils - Tools for working with Data Matrix 2D bar-codes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1428759 Dan Horák changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||dmtx-utils-0.7.4-2.fc27 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2017-06-23 10:02:41 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1441805] Review Request: kexi - An integrated environment for managing data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441805 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- kdb-3.0.1-1.fc26 kexi-3.0.1-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-57ab847ef7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1441804] Review Request: kdb - Database Connectivity and Creation Framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441804 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- kdb-3.0.1-1.fc26 kexi-3.0.1-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-57ab847ef7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1441805] Review Request: kexi - An integrated environment for managing data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441805 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- kdb-3.0.1-1.fc26 kexi-3.0.1-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-57ab847ef7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1441805] Review Request: kexi - An integrated environment for managing data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441805 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 1462983] Review Request: python-phonenumbers - A Python port of Google's libphonenumber
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462983 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 1462983] Review Request: python-phonenumbers - A Python port of Google's libphonenumber
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462983 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-phonenumbers-8.5.2-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-67f5adee78 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1370644] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370644 --- Comment #7 from Aurelien Bompard --- Igor, I'm happy to co-maintain it with you, or to let you maintain it if you prefer. It's only a dependency for me, so I'm not directly interested in it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1413474] Review Request: python-pycdlib - Pure Python library for ISO manipulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1413474 --- Comment #16 from Gwyn Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-pycdlib -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1441805] Review Request: kexi - An integrated environment for managing data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441805 --- Comment #7 from Gwyn Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/kexi -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1462443] Review Request: libaec - Adaptive Entropy Coding library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462443 --- Comment #8 from Gwyn Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/libaec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1462983] Review Request: python-phonenumbers - A Python port of Google's libphonenumber
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462983 --- Comment #11 from Gwyn Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-phonenumbers -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876 --- Comment #10 from Neal Gompa --- It's really up to Aurelien and Igor. This is a dependency for the Mailman 3 suite, which is why Aurelian was packaging it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1462760] Review Request: gir-to-d - Tool to create D bindings from GObject introspection files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462760 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 1462760] Review Request: gir-to-d - Tool to create D bindings from GObject introspection files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462760 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- gir-to-d-0.11.0-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-0ef6519c65 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1370644] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370644 --- Comment #6 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- It's worth to point out that Igor's request was filled first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876 --- Comment #9 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- It's worth to point out that Igor's request was filled first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876 Jaroslav Škarvada changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jskar...@redhat.com --- Comment #8 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #7) > Oh dear, there were two parallel reviews going on for > python-django-picklefield... Thanks for info, this is unlucky. Could Igor and Aurelien agree on further steps? I.e. who will maintain it? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1370644] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370644 --- Comment #5 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4) > Oh dear, there were *two* reviews going on in parallel for > python-django-picklefield... Thanks for info, this is unlucky. Could Igor and Aurelien agree on further steps? I.e. who will maintain it? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1435876] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - Pickled object field for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876 --- Comment #7 from Neal Gompa --- Oh dear, there were two parallel reviews going on for python-django-picklefield... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1370644 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1370644] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370644 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aurel...@bompard.org, ||ngomp...@gmail.com See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1435876 --- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa --- Oh dear, there were *two* reviews going on in parallel for python-django-picklefield... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1450590
James Hogarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asymptotically...@gmail.com
Flags||needinfo?(asymptotically508
||@gmail.com)
--- Comment #12 from James Hogarth ---
So the FPC agree the wording needs to be cleaned up, but the way the libraries
are handled in watchman complies with policy :)
So the only things that need to be cleared up IIRC are:
- Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
Note: watchman-2.spec should be watchman.spec
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Spec_file_name
- Directory /usr/share/doc/watchman-4.7.0 is not owned
- Either use %doc and let it copy over to the right location or set %doc at the
start
of the path to where documentation is installed, don't do both in %files
- The v in %changelog should not be there, only the number eg 4.7.0-3 not
v4.7.0-3
- %install must not have the rm -rf line
- The spec in your review must match the spec in the srpm for the review
If you can please update with that sorted out I'll be able to approve the
package, and then do a quick review of your informal reviews and if all good
get you in the packagers group :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1370644] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370644 Arthur Mello changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(ignatenko@redhat. | |com)| --- Comment #3 from Arthur Mello --- (In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #2) > The package was orphaned with message "upstream dead". It's currently not > true, because there are upstream commits from May. Unfortunately the package > was later retired, so we need to follow unretire process [1] and re-review > is part of it. > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers Thanks Jaroslav. Since, otherwise this name issue, everything seemed fine during review, I am approving the review of 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 1354115] Review Request: python-aenum - Advanced Enumerations ( compatible with Python's stdlib Enum), NamedTuples, and NamedConstants
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1354115
--- Comment #1 from Jan Černý ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "BSD (3 clause)", "*No copyright* BSD", "Unknown or generated".
9 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/jcerny/1354115-python-aenum/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 266240 bytes in 6 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
python2-aenum , python3-aenum
[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 in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{build
[Bug 1439894] Review Request: ddiskit - tool for building Driver Update Disk modules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1439894
Zdenek Dohnal changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(po...@redhat.com)
--- Comment #10 from Zdenek Dohnal ---
Hi,
there is output of fedora-review, some other issues appeared, would you mind
solving them?
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- No %config files under /usr.
Note: %config(noreplace) /usr/share/ddiskit/ddiskit.config
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Configuration_files
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
buildrequires needs to be python2-devel and python2-setuptools
- Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#macros
- 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.
Note: License file COPYING is not marked as %license
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
- weak dependencies on mock and rpm-build? why and is it necessary?
- if it is not python module (it is not meant to import ddiskit scripts in
other
programs), no directory /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ddiskit and files in
it shouldn't be there
- use fully qualified url
= 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: "GPL (v3)", "Unknown or generated". 14 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/zdohnal/repo_upstream/ddiskit/review-ddiskit/licensecheck.txt
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/share/ddiskit
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/ddiskit
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
Note: %defattr present but not needed
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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]: 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 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]: 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
Pxthon:
[x]: Python eggs must not do
[Bug 1370644] Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370644 Jaroslav Škarvada changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jskar...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- (In reply to Arthur Mello from comment #1) > Issues: > === > - Package does not use a name that already exists. > Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-django-picklefield > See: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ > NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Package_Names The package was orphaned with message "upstream dead". It's currently not true, because there are upstream commits from May. Unfortunately the package was later retired, so we need to follow unretire process [1] and re-review is part of it. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
