[Bug 1509568] Review Request: mellowplayer - Cloud music integration for your desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509568 mgans...@alice.dechanged: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-01-23 07:01:32 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1514002] Review Request: libqxt-qt5 - Extended version of the original Qt extension library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514002 mgans...@alice.dechanged: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-01-23 07:00:48 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1536993] Review Request: notejot - Stupidly-simple sticky notes applet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536993 Robert-André Mauchinchanged: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Package approved. 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: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 32 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/notejot /review-notejot/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/icons/hicolor/64x64@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2 [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2 [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. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [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. [-]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]:
[Bug 1368855] Review Request: radare2 - The reverse engineering framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368855 Lubomir Rintelchanged: What|Removed |Added Keywords|Reopened| Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |DEFERRED Last Closed|2017-02-22 08:47:26 |2018-01-23 06:14:54 --- Comment #25 from Lubomir Rintel --- Closing this, hopefully someone else will package this. It's been already FE-DEADREVIEW before, this doesn't seem to be progressing and submitter is not responding. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1534799] Review Request: python-hdfs - HdfsCLI: API and command line interface for HDFS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534799 --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)--- Hi! Updated spec/srpms: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-hdfs/python-hdfs.spec https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-hdfs/python-hdfs-2.1.0-2.fc27.src.rpm I've fixed the build and the docs etc. Was waiting for python-avro to build in rawhide. Cheers! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1536077] Review Request: jackson-bom - Bill of materials POM for Jackson projects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536077 Mat Boothchanged: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Fixed In Version||jackson-bom-2.9.3-1.fc28 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2018-01-23 05:17:42 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1536984] Review Request: sequeler - SQL Client built in Vala
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536984 --- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini--- Thanks 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 1536882] Review Request: harvey - Color contrast checker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536882 --- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini--- Thanks 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 1536873] Review Request: dippi - Calculate display info like DPI and aspect ratio
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536873 --- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini--- Thanks 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