[Bug 1559938] Review Request: container-exception-logger - logging from a container to a host

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559938

Miroslav Suchý  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchý  ---
Taking

-- 
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 1560111] Review Request: rubygem-crass - CSS parser based on the CSS Syntax Level 3 spec

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560111

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||vondr...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch  ---
Just two remarks:

1. It would be nice if you provided Koji scratch build.
2. You don't have to remove the .gemspec, if you are using the %setup macro to
expand the 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 1560446] Review Request: R-gplots - Various R Programming Tools for Plotting Data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560446



--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade  ---
This package built on koji: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25982862

-- 
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 1560446] New: Review Request: R-gplots - Various R Programming Tools for Plotting Data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560446

Bug ID: 1560446
   Summary: Review Request: R-gplots - Various R Programming Tools
for Plotting Data
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org




Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-gplots.spec
SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-gplots-3.0.1-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
Various R programming tools for plotting data, including:
- calculating and plotting locally smoothed summary function,
- enhanced versions of standard plots,
- manipulating colors,
- calculating and plotting two-dimensional data summaries,
- enhanced regression diagnostic plots,
- formula-enabled interface to 'stats::lowess' function,
- displaying textual data in plots,
- plotting a matrix where each cell contains a dot whose size reflects the
  relative magnitude of the elements,
- plotting "Venn" diagrams,
- displaying Open-Office style plots,
- plotting multiple data on same region, with separate axes,
- plotting means and confidence intervals,
- spacing points in an x-y plot so they don't overlap.

-- 
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 1548077] Review Request: libyami - Yet Another Media Infrastructure

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1548077

Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-03-26 04:25:18



-- 
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 1553377] Review Request: libyami-utils - Libyami Utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553377

Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-03-26 04:25:25



-- 
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 1553377] Review Request: libyami-utils - Libyami Utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553377
Bug 1553377 depends on bug 1548077, which changed state.

Bug 1548077 Summary: Review Request: libyami - Yet Another Media Infrastructure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1548077

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE



-- 
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 1559938] Review Request: container-exception-logger - logging from a container to a host

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559938



--- Comment #2 from Miroslav Suchý  ---
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.
[-]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/.build-id(kde-
 
 waived out and I opened this topic on fedora-packaging mailing list
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package 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]: 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]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
 Note: Could not download Source0: https://github.com/abrt/container-
 exception-logger/archive/1.0.1/container-exception-logger-1.0.1.tar.gz
 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags
[!]: 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.
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[!]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
 Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[-]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
 It does not make sense here as all final files are generated.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not

[Bug 1560495] New: Review Request: openmeeg - Low-frequency bio-electromagnetism solving forward problems in the field of EEG and MEG

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560495

Bug ID: 1560495
   Summary: Review Request: openmeeg - Low-frequency
bio-electromagnetism solving forward problems in the
field of EEG and MEG
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: anto.tra...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/openmeeg/openmeeg.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/openmeeg/openmeeg-2.4-0.1.20180323gitee565c4.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
The OpenMEEG software is a C++ package for solving the forward
problems of electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG).

Fedora Account System Username: sagitter

-- 
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 1560495] Review Request: openmeeg - Low-frequency bio-electromagnetism solving forward problems in the field of EEG and MEG

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560495

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1288737 (openmeeg)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288737
[Bug 1288737] Review Request: openmeeg - Low-frequency bio-electromagnetism
solving forward problems in the field of EEG and MEG
-- 
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 1288737] Review Request: openmeeg - Low-frequency bio-electromagnetism solving forward problems in the field of EEG and MEG

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288737

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1560495




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560495
[Bug 1560495] Review Request: openmeeg - Low-frequency bio-electromagnetism
solving forward problems in the field of EEG and MEG
-- 
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 1560495] Review Request: openmeeg - Low-frequency bio-electromagnetism solving forward problems in the field of EEG and MEG

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560495

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1276941 (fedora-neuro)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276941
[Bug 1276941] Fedora NeuroImaging and NeuroScience tracking 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 1560498] New: Review Request: golang-github-buger-jsonparser - Alternative JSON parser for Go that does not require schema (so far fastest)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560498

Bug ID: 1560498
   Summary: Review Request: golang-github-buger-jsonparser -
Alternative JSON parser for Go that does not require
schema (so far fastest)
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: domi...@greysector.net
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/golang-github-buger-jsonparser/golang-github-buger-jsonparser.spec
SRPM URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/golang-github-buger-jsonparser/golang-github-buger-jsonparser-0-0.1.20180322git2cac668.20180322git2cac668.fc27.src.rpm
Description:
Alternative JSON parser for Go (so far fastest)

It does not require you to know the structure of the payload (eg. create
structs), and allows accessing fields by providing the path to them. It is up
to
10 times faster than standard encoding/json package (depending on payload size
and usage), allocates no memory.

Fedora Account System Username: rathann

-- 
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 1419379] Review Request: libefp - A full implementation of the Effective Fragment Potential (EFP) method

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419379

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|anto.tra...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



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

[Bug 1560498] Review Request: golang-github-buger-jsonparser - Alternative JSON parser for Go that does not require schema (so far fastest)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560498



--- Comment #1 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  ---
Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25985675

-- 
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 1419379] Review Request: libefp - A full implementation of the Effective Fragment Potential (EFP) method

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419379

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||susi.leht...@iki.fi
 Whiteboard||AwaitingSubmitter, NotReady
  Flags||needinfo?(susi.lehtola@iki.
   ||fi)



--- Comment #4 from Antonio Trande  ---
Please, update your src package to latest version.

-- 
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 1560111] Review Request: rubygem-crass - CSS parser based on the CSS Syntax Level 3 spec

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560111



--- Comment #3 from Pavel Valena  ---
Thanks for the review!

Vít, thank you for checking.
Ad:
  1. Sure, sorry. I thought I did, but forgot to paste it.
  2. Hmm, interesting. Thats a nice side-effect :). I'll remove it then.

-- 
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 1421605] Container Review Request: nginx - Platform for running nginx or building nginx-based application

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1421605

Marek Skalický  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 CC||mskal...@redhat.com
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-03-26 07:00:52



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

[Bug 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
godot-3.0.2-2.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-de2aa691a1

-- 
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 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |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 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
godot-3.0.2-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-cca3843e51

-- 
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 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
godot-3.0.2-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-02f57f019e

-- 
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 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
godot-3.0.2-2.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1b5f2cfdef

-- 
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 1419379] Review Request: libefp - A full implementation of the Effective Fragment Potential (EFP) method

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419379

Susi Lehtola  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Whiteboard|AwaitingSubmitter, NotReady |



--- Comment #5 from Susi Lehtola  ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #4)
> Please, update your src package to latest version.

I did it already once above per request. It's not a MUST.

However, re-updated spec and srpm at

Spec URL: https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/libefp.spec
SRPM URL: https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/libefp-1.5.0-1.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 1419379] Review Request: libefp - A full implementation of the Effective Fragment Potential (EFP) method

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419379

Susi Lehtola  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(susi.lehtola@iki. |
   |fi) |



-- 
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 1559699] Review Request: libdasm - Simple x86 disassembly library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559699

Michal Ambroz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1559711 (libemu)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559711
[Bug 1559711] Review Request: libemu - The x86 shell-code detection and
emulation
-- 
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 1559711] Review Request: libemu - The x86 shell-code detection and emulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559711

Michal Ambroz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal)
 Depends On||1559699 (libdasm)



--- Comment #3 from Michal Ambroz  ---
Known issue - there is embedded version 1.4 of the libdasm library.
This should be de-referenced and updated to current version.

Adding dependency to #1559699


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235
[Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559699
[Bug 1559699] Review Request: libdasm - Simple x86 disassembly library
-- 
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 1376749] Review Request: golang-github-klauspost-compress - Optimized compression packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376749

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||domi...@greysector.net



--- Comment #2 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  ---
FYI, testsuite will fail if you don't apply
https://github.com/klauspost/compress/commit/b88785bfd699aa994985ea91b90ee8a1721c3fe1
. Also, it might be worth it to apply
https://github.com/klauspost/compress/commit/e80ca55b53e5e6f53deed5c7842e7b7da95e1dc7
as well, to reduce dependencies, because current Fedora and EPEL ship golang
1.8+.

-- 
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 1376749] Review Request: golang-github-klauspost-compress - Optimized compression packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376749



--- Comment #3 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  ---
Created attachment 1413093
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1413093&action=edit
alternative spec file

Attaching my spec made using https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/More_Go_packaging
for reference. Feel free to use 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 1559786] Review Request: libvirt-dbus - This package provides integration between libvirt and the DBus

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559786



--- Comment #10 from Cole Robinson  ---
I've added/sponsored Pavel for the packagers group now

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

[Bug 1524133] Review Request: deepin-calculator - an easy to use calculator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1524133



--- Comment #8 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/deepin-calculator

-- 
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 1328248] Review Request: python-pysword - Python bindings to read Sword bible files directly

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328248



--- Comment #30 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pysword

-- 
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 1559786] Review Request: libvirt-dbus - This package provides integration between libvirt and the DBus

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559786



--- Comment #11 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libvirt-dbus

-- 
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 1558578] Review Request: python-copr-common - Python code used by Copr

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558578



--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-copr-common

-- 
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 1559938] Review Request: container-exception-logger - logging from a container to a host

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559938



--- Comment #3 from Matej Habrnal  ---
Updated:
Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~mhabrnal/container-exception-logger.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~mhabrnal/container-exception-logger-1.0.2-1.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 1559718] Review Request: R-mlbench - Machine Learning Benchmark Problems

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559718

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1559721] Review Request: R-R.utils - Various Programming Utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559721

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---


 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1378860] Review Request: jetty-setuid - SetUID support for jetty

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378860

Michael Simacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW)
 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
  Flags|fedora-review?  |
Last Closed||2018-03-26 09:56:19



--- Comment #8 from Michael Simacek  ---
I'm no longer interested in packaging this component, sorry for taking your
time


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449
[Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter
response should be blocking this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427941] Review Request: aries-spifly - Reference Implementation of the OSGi ServiceLoader Mediator specification

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427941



--- Comment #3 from Michael Simacek  ---
The package was still not requested to be added to Fedora. If there's no
response within a week I'll close this review as stalled.

-- 
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 1559738] Review Request: R-ape - Analyses of Phylogenetics and Evolution

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559738

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #14 from Jie Kang  ---
OpenJDK contains JARs in source. Most are under openjdk/test/* which I believe
is acceptable.

./openjdk/src/utils/IdealGraphVisualizer/branding/modules/org-netbeans-core-windows.jar
./openjdk/src/utils/IdealGraphVisualizer/branding/core/core.jar

are under source utilities. Are these exceptions too?

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #15 from jiri vanek  ---
Wou. I have never noticed those two.
I would say that yes, the ons in test are aceptable, otherwise it will not be
possibel to run the tests from src.rpm.
On contrary, the ones in  utils seems just wrong. I will remove them and see.

-- 
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 1560246] Review Request: R-jose - JavaScript Object Signing and Encryption

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560246

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1559938] Review Request: container-exception-logger - logging from a container to a host

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559938

Miroslav Suchý  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #4 from Miroslav Suchý  ---
APPROVED

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

[Bug 1551402] Review Request: falkon - Modern web browser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551402

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
falkon-3.0.0-3.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 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-2018-53e38ed770

-- 
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 1555219] Review Request: R-gdata - Various R Programming Tools for Data Manipulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1555219

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-gdata-2.18.0-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 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-2018-37ebcab3ac

-- 
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 1560305] Review Request: R-rlang - Functions for Base Types and Core R and 'Tidyverse' Features

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560305

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #16 from Jie Kang  ---
Few things are now "Manual review needed".

Questions:
1. Are the unversioned .so files listed below okay?
2. Which package creates
'/usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug'? I'd like to see
if it's owned. I checked the rest from the previous review and they seem okay
to me.
3. 'java-openjdk-devel' has provides application() &&
application(java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-4.fc27.x86_64-jconsole.desktop), these
look strange to me, is this expected?
4. Can you check SHOULD item: 'Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if
applicable.' Is it okay?

Thanks!


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]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: See below for list of unversioned .so files
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
 must be documented in the spec.
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug/lib,
 /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
 Note: %defattr present but not needed
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[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 java-openjdk, java-openjdk-debug
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package 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]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mfl

[Bug 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #17 from Jie Kang  ---
Also for provides:

Provides

java-openjdk-debuginfo:
debuginfo(build-id)
java-openjdk-debuginfo
java-openjdk-debuginfo(x86-64)


is debuginfo(build-id) okay? Looks strange.

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #18 from jiri vanek  ---

> is debuginfo(build-id) okay? Looks strange. 

is perfectly ok. Thats something what rpm do since f27 - each subpackage have
those ids, and they are stored as you see it i was buffled by it when I saw it
first time too.

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #19 from jiri vanek  ---
> 1. Are the unversioned .so files listed below okay?

Should be. They are all considered as internal. I failed to tell it to RPM.
If we insists on versioning, I can symlink the.so files with .so.MAJORJDKV
neighbours. But I dont think it is good idea.

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #20 from jiri vanek  ---
> /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug

It shoudl no longer exists. It hsould be
/usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-slowdebug now.
It is created (AFAIK)  by
java-openjdk-headless-slowdebug-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64
What is wrong with 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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #21 from jiri vanek  ---
> 'java-openjdk-devel' has provides application() && 
> application(java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-4.fc27.x86_64-jconsole.desktop), these 
> look strange to me, is this expected?

What is strange on that? :) We have paralel isntalls, so dull NVRA is
propagated into jconsole desktop file. Same was jdk 9,8,7... With jconsole (and
[removed] policy tool)

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #22 from Jie Kang  ---
(In reply to jiri vanek from comment #20)
> > /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug
> 
> It shoudl no longer exists. It hsould be
> /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-slowdebug now.
> It is created (AFAIK)  by
> java-openjdk-headless-slowdebug-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64
> What is wrong with it?

(In reply to jiri vanek from comment #20)
> > /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug
> 
> It shoudl no longer exists. It hsould be
> /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-slowdebug now.
> It is created (AFAIK)  by
> java-openjdk-headless-slowdebug-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64
> What is wrong with it?

Oh, nothing is wrong. I just wanted to check if the directory has the correct
owner but I wasn't sure which package to install. Tested now and looks good,
thanks!

Item:
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug/lib,
 /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug

is now

[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug/lib,
 /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug

Not sure why it shows that though... it is owned when I install the package and
check the directory.

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #23 from Jie Kang  ---
(In reply to Jie Kang from comment #22)
> (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #20)
> > > /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug
> > 
> > It shoudl no longer exists. It hsould be
> > /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-slowdebug now.
> > It is created (AFAIK)  by
> > java-openjdk-headless-slowdebug-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64
> > What is wrong with it?
> 
> (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #20)
> > > /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug
> > 
> > It shoudl no longer exists. It hsould be
> > /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-slowdebug now.
> > It is created (AFAIK)  by
> > java-openjdk-headless-slowdebug-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64
> > What is wrong with it?
> 
> Oh, nothing is wrong. I just wanted to check if the directory has the
> correct owner but I wasn't sure which package to install. Tested now and
> looks good, thanks!
> 
> Item:
> [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
>  /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug/lib,
>  /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug
> 
> is now
> 
> [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
>  /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug/lib,
>  /usr/lib/jvm/java-10-openjdk-10.0.0.46-3.fc27.x86_64-debug
> 
> Not sure why it shows that though... it is owned when I install the package
> and check the directory.

Also should be slowdebug; I used wrong text file, my bad! Anyways; no issue
here.

-- 
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 1560639] New: Review Request: python-social-auth-core - The core component of the python-social-auth ecosystem

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560639

Bug ID: 1560639
   Summary: Review Request:  python-social-auth-core - The core
component of the python-social-auth ecosystem
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jer...@jcline.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



SRPM URL:
https://jcline.fedorapeople.org/python-social-auth-core-1.7.0-1.fc29.src.rpm
Spec URL: https://jcline.fedorapeople.org/python-social-auth-core.spec
Description:
Python Social Auth is an easy to setup social
authentication/registration mechanism with support for several frameworks and
auth providers. This is the core component of the python-social-auth ecosystem,
it implements the common interface to define new authentication backends to
third parties services, implement integrations with web frameworks and storage
solutions.

Note: This is the same project as
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-social-auth, but it has been split
into many separate projects/packages. Each package maps to a framework (flask,
django, etc) so it's not possible to obsolete the old package with this
package. The old package needs to be retired once this and all the subpackages
have been accepted.

FAS: jcline
Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25989113

-- 
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 1560343] Review Request: R-date - Functions for Handling Dates

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560343

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #24 from jiri vanek  ---
> Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in 

Unluckily, we have it mostly opposite. java-openjdk requires
%{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}  (?1 is nothing
xor debug) and rest is usually transitive. Main package have: Requires:
%{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release} correctly

 java-openjdk-headless - requires nothing, as rest requires it
 java-openjdk-devel - Requires: %{name}%{?1}%{?_isa} =
%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}  ?1 confuses rpmlint?
 java-openjdk-jmods - Requires: %{name}-devel%{?1} =
%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release
 java-openjdk-demo , Requires: %{name}%{?1}%{?_isa} =
%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
 java-openjdk-src ,Requires: %{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} =
%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
 java-openjdk-javadoc-zip , hmm.. no requires, no provides... hmmm Issue?
 java-openjdk-accessibility , Requires: %{name}%{?1}%{?_isa} =
%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release (agaiin, ?1 confused it?)
 java-openjdk-javadoc , no requirement. imho it deserves to be included
without jre itself.

If non-debug are good, then those are also good, as the macro is generating
them. In addition, thoise will never be discovered by rpmlint, as those depends
on java-openjdk-whatever-debug version (in same rationale as normla ones). And
(imho) have no reason te depend on nonrmal ones.
 java-openjdk-debug
 java-openjdk-headless-debug , 
 java-openjdk-devel-debug
 java-openjdk-jmods-debug ,
 java-openjdk-demo-debug
 java-openjdk-src-debug ,
 java-openjdk-javadoc-debug ,
 java-openjdk-javadoc-zip-debug ,
 java-openjdk-accessibility-debug ,

 java-openjdk-debugsource - What is this?
 java-openjdk-debuginfo ,  And what is this?


So imho the only real issue (unlessomebody tells me whta are those last two) is
 java-openjdk-javadoc-zip.
Imho should be fixed. No requires - same reasoning as javadoc, but some virtual
provides shouldbe there.
So taken  from javadoc:

%define java_javadoc_rpo() %{expand:
OrderWithRequires: %{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} =
%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
# Post requires alternatives to install javadoc alternative
Requires(post):   %{_sbindir}/alternatives
# in version 1.7 and higher for --family switch
Requires(post):   chkconfig >= 1.7
# Postun requires alternatives to uninstall javadoc alternative
Requires(postun): %{_sbindir}/alternatives
# in version 1.7 and higher for --family switch
Requires(postun):   chkconfig >= 1.7

# Standard JPackage javadoc provides
Provides: java-javadoc-zip%{?1} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
Provides: java-%{javaver}-javadoc-zip%{?1} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
Provides: java-%{javaver}-%{origin}-javadoc-zip =
%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
}

Including also alternatives, as spec contains 
alternatives   --install %{_javadocdir}/java-zip javadoczip  lines


What do you think?

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #25 from jiri vanek  ---
s/java_javadoc_rpo/java_javadoc_zip_rpo/

-- 
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 1555219] Review Request: R-gdata - Various R Programming Tools for Data Manipulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1555219



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-gdata-2.18.0-2.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-2018-1af053b7ae

-- 
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 1560347] Review Request: R-fts - R interface to tslib ( a time series library in c++)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560347

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1419379] Review Request: libefp - A full implementation of the Effective Fragment Potential (EFP) method

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419379



--- Comment #6 from Antonio Trande  ---
Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: libefp-debugsource :
  /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/balance.h libefp-
  debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/clapack.h
  libefp-debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/efp.h
  libefp-debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/elec.h
  libefp-debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/int.h
  libefp-debugsource :
  /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/intshift.h libefp-
  debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/log.h libefp-
  debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/mathutil.h
  libefp-debugsource :
  /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/private.h libefp-
  debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/stream.h
  libefp-debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/swf.h
  libefp-debugsource :
  /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/terms.h libefp-debugsource
  : /usr/src/debug/libefp-1.5.0-1.fc29.x86_64/src/util.h
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages

- Use new ldconfig scriptlet

- Why tests are not performed?
  (You need to compile the EFPMD program:
https://github.com/ilyak/libefp#efpmd)

- You can activate OpenMP/MPI parallelization too.
  Are you not interested about?

- BLAS library is not detected:

...
-- Found Threads: TRUE  
-- A library with BLAS API not found. Please specify library location.
-- LAPACK requires BLAS
-- LAPACK detected.
-- Found TargetLAPACK: Found LAPACK:  
...

- libefp.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libefp.so.1.5 ...

Probably, 'undefined-non-weak-symbol' are there for missing linkage to the BLAS
library. 


= MUST items =

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

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated",
 "*No copyright* BSD (unspecified)". 141 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/sagitter/1419379-libefp/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packagin

[Bug 1555219] Review Request: R-gdata - Various R Programming Tools for Data Manipulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1555219



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-gdata-2.18.0-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 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-2018-4e93f0cdf3

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #26 from Jie Kang  ---
(In reply to jiri vanek from comment #24)
> > Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
>  Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in 
> 
> Unluckily, we have it mostly opposite. java-openjdk requires
> %{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}  (?1 is
> nothing xor debug) and rest is usually transitive. Main package have:
> Requires: %{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
> correctly
> 
>  java-openjdk-headless - requires nothing, as rest requires it
>  java-openjdk-devel - Requires: %{name}%{?1}%{?_isa} =
> %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}  ?1 confuses rpmlint?
>  java-openjdk-jmods - Requires: %{name}-devel%{?1} =
> %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release
>  java-openjdk-demo , Requires: %{name}%{?1}%{?_isa} =
> %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
>  java-openjdk-src ,Requires: %{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} =
> %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
>  java-openjdk-javadoc-zip , hmm.. no requires, no provides... hmmm Issue?
>  java-openjdk-accessibility , Requires: %{name}%{?1}%{?_isa} =
> %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release (agaiin, ?1 confused it?)
>  java-openjdk-javadoc , no requirement. imho it deserves to be included
> without jre itself.
> 
> If non-debug are good, then those are also good, as the macro is generating
> them. In addition, thoise will never be discovered by rpmlint, as those
> depends on java-openjdk-whatever-debug version (in same rationale as normla
> ones). And (imho) have no reason te depend on nonrmal ones.
>  java-openjdk-debug
>  java-openjdk-headless-debug , 
>  java-openjdk-devel-debug
>  java-openjdk-jmods-debug ,
>  java-openjdk-demo-debug
>  java-openjdk-src-debug ,
>  java-openjdk-javadoc-debug ,
>  java-openjdk-javadoc-zip-debug ,
>  java-openjdk-accessibility-debug ,
> 
>  java-openjdk-debugsource - What is this?
>  java-openjdk-debuginfo ,  And what is this?
> 
> 
> So imho the only real issue (unlessomebody tells me whta are those last two)
> is  java-openjdk-javadoc-zip.
> Imho should be fixed. No requires - same reasoning as javadoc, but some
> virtual provides shouldbe there.
> So taken  from javadoc:
> 
> %define java_javadoc_rpo() %{expand:
> OrderWithRequires: %{name}-headless%{?1}%{?_isa} =
> %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
> # Post requires alternatives to install javadoc alternative
> Requires(post):   %{_sbindir}/alternatives
> # in version 1.7 and higher for --family switch
> Requires(post):   chkconfig >= 1.7
> # Postun requires alternatives to uninstall javadoc alternative
> Requires(postun): %{_sbindir}/alternatives
> # in version 1.7 and higher for --family switch
> Requires(postun):   chkconfig >= 1.7
> 
> # Standard JPackage javadoc provides
> Provides: java-javadoc-zip%{?1} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
> Provides: java-%{javaver}-javadoc-zip%{?1} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
> Provides: java-%{javaver}-%{origin}-javadoc-zip =
> %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
> }
> 
> Including also alternatives, as spec contains 
> alternatives   --install %{_javadocdir}/java-zip javadoczip  lines
> 
> 
> What do you think?

Fix for javadoc-zip sounds okay to me. Is zip format for javadoc used by many
people? Just curious.

debuginfo and debugsource package info:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SubpackageAndSourceDebuginfo

I'm not sure if these are supposed to apply for openjdk package. Do you know?

-- 
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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #27 from Jie Kang  ---
Created attachment 1413241
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1413241&action=edit
rpmlint output from installed packages

I attached rpmlint output run on all installed packages. Note rpmlint checks
more on installed packages than it does on uninstalled package by itself.

TLDR:
25 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 241 errors, 8540 warnings.

8368/8540 warnings are:

W: undefined-non-weak-symbol

This thread [1] has some people's comments on it. I think it's not a blocker
but I wonder if it can ever be fixed: possibly upstream? I don't know enough to
comment, sorry.

[1]
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-September/msg00831.html

Also look at other messages in above thread for more info.

-- 
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 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
godot-3.0.2-2.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 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
godot-3.0.2-2.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 1552767] Review Request: godot - Multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine with a feature-rich editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552767



--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System  ---
godot-3.0.2-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 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 1542931] Review Request: cri-tools - CLI and validation tools for Container Runtime Interface

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1542931

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 1542931] Review Request: cri-tools - CLI and validation tools for Container Runtime Interface

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1542931



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
cri-tools-1.0.0-3.alpha.0.git8e6013a.fc27 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5749109ec8

-- 
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 1560350] Review Request: R-xfun - Miscellaneous Functions by ' Yihui Xie'

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560350

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1560361] Review Request: R-gamlss.dist - Distributions for Generalized Additive Models for Location Scale and Shape

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560361

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1560370] Review Request: R-gss - General Smoothing Splines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560370

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1560372] Review Request: R-FMStable - Finite Moment Stable Distributions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560372

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

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

[Bug 1553053] Review Request: R-fastmatch - Fast match() function

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553053

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 1553053] Review Request: R-fastmatch - Fast match() function

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553053



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-fastmatch-1.1.0-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-601f3707b6

-- 
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 1553053] Review Request: R-fastmatch - Fast match() function

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553053



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-fastmatch-1.1.0-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-b437e5cc05

-- 
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 1553082] Review Request: R-webutils - Utility Functions for Developing Web Applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553082



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-webutils-0.6-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-db226beb70

-- 
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 1553054] Review Request: R-bit - A class for vectors of 1-bit booleans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553054



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-bit-1.1.12-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c8faeba623

-- 
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 1553054] Review Request: R-bit - A class for vectors of 1-bit booleans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553054



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-bit-1.1.12-2.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-86ef05248e

-- 
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 1553054] Review Request: R-bit - A class for vectors of 1-bit booleans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553054

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 1553082] Review Request: R-webutils - Utility Functions for Developing Web Applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553082

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 1553082] Review Request: R-webutils - Utility Functions for Developing Web Applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1553082



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-webutils-0.6-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-11eedbf267

-- 
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 1532042] Review Request: compton - Compositor for X11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532042



--- Comment #17 from Mamoru TASAKA  ---
Would someone update the status of this review 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 1560764] New: Review Request: R-argon2 - Secure Password Hashing

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560764

Bug ID: 1560764
   Summary: Review Request: R-argon2 - Secure Password Hashing
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org




Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-argon2.spec
SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-argon2-0.2.0-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
Utilities for secure password hashing via the argon2 algorithm. It is a
relatively new hashing algorithm and is believed to be very secure. The
'argon2' implementation included in the package is the reference
implementation.  The package also includes some utilities that should be
useful for digest authentication, including a wrapper of 'blake2b'.  For
similar R packages, see sodium and 'bcrypt'.  See
 or
 for more information.

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

[Bug 1560764] Review Request: R-argon2 - Secure Password Hashing

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560764



--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade  ---
This package built on koji: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25993081

-- 
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 1560823] New: Review Request: erlang-eimp - Erlang Image Manipulation Process

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560823

Bug ID: 1560823
   Summary: Review Request: erlang-eimp - Erlang Image
Manipulation Process
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rbar...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/erlang-eimp.spec
SRPM URL: https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/erlang-eimp-1.0.2-1.fc28.src.rpm
Description: eimp is an Erlang/Elixir application for manipulating graphic
images
using external C libraries. It supports WebP, JPEG, PNG and GIF.
Fedora Account System Username: bowlofeggs

Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25994133

-- 
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 1560823] Review Request: erlang-eimp - Erlang Image Manipulation Process

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560823

Randy Barlow  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1560117




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560117
[Bug 1560117] ejabberd-18.03 is available
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1559861] Review Request: php-mock-phpunit2 - Mock built-in PHP functions with PHPUnit

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559861



--- Comment #3 from Remi Collet  ---
Thanks for the review!

SCM requests
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5407
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5408
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5409

-- 
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 1559858] Review Request: php-mock-integration2 - Integration package for PHP-Mock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559858



--- Comment #2 from Remi Collet  ---
Thanks for the review

SCM requests
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5410
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5411
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5412

-- 
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 1559857] Review Request: php-mock2 - PHP-Mock can mock built-in PHP functions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559857



--- Comment #2 from Remi Collet  ---
Thanks for the review!

SCM requests
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5413
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5414
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5415

-- 
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 1560834] New: Review Request: - < short summary here>

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560834

Bug ID: 1560834
   Summary: Review Request:  - 
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: a...@onthewings.net
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://gist.github.com/andyli/4083edbf8b9b2d0c7784360c542ef6a1/raw/bc4616b1517a20877239e02c7e0b7b6408ef2960/ocaml-sha.spec
SRPM URL:
https://gist.github.com/andyli/4083edbf8b9b2d0c7784360c542ef6a1/raw/bc4616b1517a20877239e02c7e0b7b6408ef2960/ocaml-sha-1.12-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: Binding to the SHA cryptographic functions
Fedora Account System Username: andyli

A binding for SHA interface code in OCaml. Offering the same interface than
the MD5 digest included in the OCaml standard library.
It's currently providing SHA1, SHA256 and SHA512 hash functions.

This is a dependency of the next version of Haxe (v4.0.0).

-- 
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 1559285] Review Request: php-nikic-php-parser4 - A PHP parser written in PHP

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559285



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-nikic-php-parser4-4.0.1-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c0c2d27534

-- 
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 1559285] Review Request: php-nikic-php-parser4 - A PHP parser written in PHP

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559285

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