[Bug 1519785] Review Request: notepadqq - An advanced text editor for developers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519785



--- Comment #5 from j...@kcore.org ---
(In reply to Ben Rosser from comment #4)
> I'm really sorry for letting this sit for several months!
> 
> Can you upload the SRPM to a more permanent place than koji, and I'll take
> another look? Your build was deleted.
> 
> But generally, it seems as though there are lots of bundled node libraries
> under "./extension_tools/node_modules" in the archive. It would be nice to
> be able to unbundle them, but if not you must add bundled provides as
> described here to the spec.
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:
> Bundled_Libraries

I'll have a look tonight. I've been tracking upstream, and they've included
some updates that I want to package, so I can probably drop the externally
included 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 1564720] Review Request: watchman - a file watching service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564720



--- Comment #4 from Lars Kellogg-Stedman  ---
Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/larsks/watchman/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00739568-watchman/watchman.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/larsks/watchman/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00739568-watchman/watchman-4.9.0-2.fc29.src.rpm
Description: Watchman exists to watch files and record when they change. It can
also trigger actions (such as rebuilding assets) when matching files change.

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

[Bug 1564720] Review Request: watchman - a file watching service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564720



--- Comment #3 from Lars Kellogg-Stedman  ---
> - Use %{_rundir} instead of /run

Done.

> - I don't think BuildRequires:  systemd is necessary.

Without that the %{_tmpfilesdir} macro is undefined.

> - Dubious files permissions:

Those are required.  It's basically just like /tmp.  I think the project should
default to using the user's home directory rather than a global directory like
that, but that's how it operates right now.

> - Files in /run should be ghosted:

Done.

> - This file should probably not included:

Good catch, fixed.

> - Some parts are also BSD and MIT

Yeah, upon inspection, the licensing is a little crazy.

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

[Bug 1565671] Review Request: gnome-control-center - Utilities to configure the GNOME desktop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565671

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1565671] Review Request: gnome-control-center - Utilities to configure the GNOME desktop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565671



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
gnome-control-center-3.28.1-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-a0a1cd4af2

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

[Bug 1562964] Review Request: python-pycares - Python interface for c-ares

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562964

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-04-10 18:58:00



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-pycares-2.3.0-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 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 1558907] Review Request: R-deldir - Delaunay Triangulation and Dirichlet (Voronoi) Tessellation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558907

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-04-10 18:58:28



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-deldir-0.1.14-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 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 1563830] Review Request: python-aiodns - Simple DNS resolver for asyncio

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563830
Bug 1563830 depends on bug 1562964, which changed state.

Bug 1562964 Summary: Review Request: python-pycares - Python interface for 
c-ares
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562964

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA



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

[Bug 1563925] Review Request: ghc-cabal-helper - Simple interface to some of Cabal' s configuration state, mainly used by ghc-mod

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563925

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-04-10 18:58:05



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
ghc-cabal-helper-0.8.0.2-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 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 1562452] Review Request: mypaint-brushes - Brushes to be used with the MyPaint library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562452

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-04-10 18:56:36



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
mypaint-brushes-1.3.0-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 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 1565367] Review Request: ghc-djinn-ghc - Generate Haskell code from a type. Bridge from Djinn to GHC API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565367

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
ghc-djinn-ghc-0.0.2.3-1.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-2018-72bf54ab64

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

[Bug 1564684] Review Request: ghc-monad-journal - Pure logger typeclass and monad transformer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564684

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
ghc-monad-journal-0.8.1-1.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-2018-888d6d6e72

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

[Bug 1549003] Review Request: python-libevdev - Python bindings to the libevdev evdev device wrapper library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1549003

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-libevdev-0.4-1.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-a6c481419b

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

[Bug 1564678] Review Request: ghc-fclabels - First class accessor labels implemented as lenses

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564678

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
ghc-fclabels-2.0.3.3-2.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-2018-1daa2eac57

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

[Bug 1564682] Review Request: ghc-djinn-lib - Generate Haskell code from a type

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564682

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
ghc-djinn-lib-0.0.1.2-1.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-2018-3d0f9e4aa8

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

[Bug 1550317] Review Request: python-flask-security - Flask-Security quickly adds security features to your Flask application

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550317

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-flask-security-3.0.0-1.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-2018-48f664b3ed

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

[Bug 1565848] Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565848

dan.cer...@cgc-instruments.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1565848] New: Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565848

Bug ID: 1565848
   Summary: Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a
compilation database for clang tooling
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: dan.cer...@cgc-instruments.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/defolos/devel/Bear.git/tree/bear.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/defolos/devel/fedora-27-ppc64le/00739589-Bear/Bear-2.3.11-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description: 
This is my first package, therefore I need a sponsor.

Bear (=Build ear) produces a compilation database in the JSON format. This
database describes how single compilation unit should be processed and can be
used by Clang tooling. This can be used to generate the JSON compilation
database when using build systems that cannot create it themselves.

Koji scratch builds:
el7: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26296400
el6: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26296413
f27: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26296506
f28: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26296521
f29: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26296559

Copr repo:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/defolos/devel/

The spec file was originally written by Pavel Odvody for Bear 2.1.2, I have
modified it so that it works with the most recent version of Bear.

Fedora Account System Username: defolos

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

[Bug 755922] Review Request: perl-Tk-Pod - Pod browser top-level widget

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755922

Petr Šabata  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed|2011-11-23 08:14:48 |2018-04-10 17:52:09



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

[Bug 796288] Review Request: perl-Tk-Getopt - User configuration window for Tk with interface to Getopt ::Long

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796288

Petr Šabata  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed|2012-02-24 03:40:29 |2018-04-10 17:51:52



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

[Bug 796322] Review Request: perl-Tk-ColoredButton - Button widget with background gradient color

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796322

Petr Šabata  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed|2012-03-07 12:25:17 |2018-04-10 17:51:13



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

[Bug 796317] Review Request: perl-Tk-Canvas-GradientColor - To create a Canvas widget with background gradient color

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796317

Petr Šabata  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed|2012-03-07 11:01:09 |2018-04-10 17:51:32



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

[Bug 894413] Review Request: davmail - DavMail is a POP/IMAP/SMTP/Caldav/ Carddav/LDAP gateway for Microsoft Exchange

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894413



--- Comment #54 from Mickaël Guessant  ---
Well, I managed to build on Centos 7, see:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:mguessan:branches:home:achimh:branches:home:dammage:davmail/davmail

Note that this is still based on source package *with libs*, not source only.

Debian package maintainers managed to build a package without binary libraries
input:
https://packages.debian.org/stretch/davmail

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

[Bug 796322] Review Request: perl-Tk-ColoredButton - Button widget with background gradient color

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796322
Bug 796322 depends on bug 796317, which changed state.

Bug 796317 Summary: Review Request: perl-Tk-Canvas-GradientColor - To create a 
Canvas widget with background gradient color
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796317

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE



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

[Bug 1564716] Review Request: dionaea - Low interaction honeypot

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564716



--- Comment #6 from Michal Ambroz  ---
Raised package request:
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5890
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5891
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5892
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5893
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5894

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

[Bug 1539291] Review Request: ghc-echo - Cross-platform, cross-console echoing of terminal input

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1539291



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
ghc-echo-0.1.3-3.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-2018-34d8fbd75e

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

[Bug 1519785] Review Request: notepadqq - An advanced text editor for developers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519785



--- Comment #4 from Ben Rosser  ---
I'm really sorry for letting this sit for several months!

Can you upload the SRPM to a more permanent place than koji, and I'll take
another look? Your build was deleted.

But generally, it seems as though there are lots of bundled node libraries
under "./extension_tools/node_modules" in the archive. It would be nice to be
able to unbundle them, but if not you must add bundled provides as described
here to the spec.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries

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

[Bug 843646] Review Request: sugar-india - Game about the geography of India

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=843646



--- Comment #9 from Ben Rosser  ---
Ping; are you still interested in this (and the other ticket, sugar-tuxmath)?
Do you intend to continue working on these packages?

It's been many months since my last comment. As per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews, please
respond within a week.

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

[Bug 1487067] Review Request: botan2 - A C++11 crypto and TLS library, version 2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1487067

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed|2018-03-06 11:44:44 |2018-04-10 15:10:21



--- Comment #43 from Fedora Update System  ---
botan2-2.4.0-10.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 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #10 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl - library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680



--- Comment #17 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libocxl

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

[Bug 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504

Javier Peña  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
  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 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #9 from Javier Peña  ---
Review notes:

- The rpmlint notes about macros in comments are expected. Unit tests are
currently disabled due to an issue in the tagged version, and should be enabled
in the future.

The package is APPROVED.

Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "BSD (unspecified)", "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated".
 34 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /tmp/1565504-python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.6/site-
 packages/sphinxcontrib, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sphinxcontrib
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2
 -sphinxcontrib-apidoc , python3-sphinxcontrib-apidoc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 

[Bug 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #8 from Chandan Kumar  ---
Updated spec:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc.spec
SRPM:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc-0.2.1-6.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 1558362] Review Request: openhantek - Oscilloscope and logic analyzer GUI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558362

Vasiliy Glazov  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CANTFIX
Last Closed||2018-04-10 12:08:57



--- Comment #6 from Vasiliy Glazov  ---
It contain blob copyright firmware.

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

[Bug 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #7 from Chandan Kumar  ---
Updated spec:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc.spec
SRPM:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc-0.2.1-5.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 1562643] Review Request: python-slixmpp - Slixmpp is an XMPP library for Python 3.4+

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562643



--- Comment #7 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-slixmpp

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl - library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680

Michel Normand  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Package Review: libocxl |Package Review: libocxl -
   |library for OpenCAPI|library for OpenCAPI
   |accelerator |accelerator



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

[Bug 1565671] Review Request: gnome-control-center - Utilities to configure the GNOME desktop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565671



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-control-center

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

[Bug 1565626] Review Request: python-nudatus - Strip comments from Python scripts

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565626



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-nudatus. You may commit to the branch
"f28" in about 10 minutes.

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680



--- Comment #16 from Michel Normand  ---
scratch build on koji:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26291946

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

[Bug 1564835] Review Request: gmediarender - Resource efficient UPnP/ DLNA renderer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564835

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #6 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package approved.



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]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 40 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/gmediarender/review-
 gmediarender/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: 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]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of 

[Bug 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #6 from Javier Peña  ---
Two final issues I have found on a test fedora-review run, and we should be
done:

- Even if we do "py.test ||", fedora-review fails when running unit tests, so
we'd better comment it out.

- In the %files section, we have:

%{python2_sitelib}/sphinxcontrib
...
%{python3_sitelib}/sphinxcontrib

Fedora-review complains that the directory is already owned by other package,
so we could try to be more specific and use:

%{python2_sitelib}/sphinxcontrib/apidoc
...
%{python3_sitelib}/sphinxcontrib/apidoc

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

[Bug 1562643] Review Request: python-slixmpp - Slixmpp is an XMPP library for Python 3.4+

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562643



--- Comment #6 from Matthieu Saulnier  ---
thanks again for the review :)

SCM repo request: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5882

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

[Bug 1563830] Review Request: python-aiodns - Simple DNS resolver for asyncio

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563830



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-aiodns

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

[Bug 1564716] Review Request: dionaea - Low interaction honeypot

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564716



--- Comment #5 from Michal Ambroz  ---
Thank you Robert-Andre.

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

[Bug 1564835] Review Request: gmediarender - Resource efficient UPnP/ DLNA renderer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564835



--- Comment #5 from Zamir SUN  ---
I just did some more research and fixed the issue on my machine. Now it works.

SPEC URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/gmediarender.spec
SRPM URL:
https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/gmediarender-0-0.8.20180410git4f221e6.fc29.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 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #5 from Chandan Kumar  ---
Updated SPEC:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc.spec
SRPM:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc-0.2.1-4.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 1565671] Review Request: gnome-control-center - Utilities to configure the GNOME desktop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565671

Chris Sandler  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||ch...@protonmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ch...@protonmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Chris Sandler  ---
Looks good. As it's a rename of an existing package, I verified that Obsoletes
and Provides are correct for both control-center and control-center filesystem
and that the renamed package builds.

The control-center name has been bothering me for a while. Thanks for finally
fixing it, Pete!

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

[Bug 1565671] New: Review Request: gnome-control-center - Utilities to configure the GNOME desktop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565671

Bug ID: 1565671
   Summary: Review Request: gnome-control-center - Utilities to
configure the GNOME desktop
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: walter.p...@yandex.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://pwalter.fedorapeople.org/gnome-control-center.spec
SRPM URL:
http://pwalter.fedorapeople.org/gnome-control-center-3.28.1-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: Rename of control-center package to gnome-control-center to follow
upstream naming.
Fedora Account System Username: pwalter

Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26290735

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

[Bug 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504

Chandan Kumar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||chku...@redhat.com



--- Comment #4 from Chandan Kumar  ---
Hello Jpena,

Thanks for the comment.
Here is the updated
SPEC: https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc.spec
SRPM:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc-0.2.1-3.fc27.src.rpm

Thanks,

Chandan Kumar

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

[Bug 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
ipython-6.3.1-1.fc28 python-backcall-0.1.0-1.fc28 has been submitted as an
update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-785c5e4c66

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

[Bug 1491281] Review Request: python-libsass - python bindings for libsass

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491281



--- Comment #19 from Marcel Plch  ---
If anyone relies on this or is blocked by this, please, let me know. This
package is not on top of my todo list.

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

[Bug 1565626] Review Request: python-nudatus - Strip comments from Python scripts

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565626



--- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok  ---
Thank You.

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

[Bug 1558683] Package python-ucsmsdk to be added to Fedora

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558683

bdemers  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(Brian.Demers@gmai |
   |l.com)  |



--- Comment #4 from bdemers  ---
Absolutely!

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

[Bug 1565626] Review Request: python-nudatus - Strip comments from Python scripts

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565626

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 #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package approved.



Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 12 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/python-nudatus/review-python-
 nudatus/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer 

[Bug 1565626] Review Request: python-nudatus - Strip comments from Python scripts

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565626

Miro Hrončok  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
   ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1387943



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

[Bug 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #3 from Javier Peña  ---
Hi Chandan,

Thanks for the fixes. I still have some comments:

- The with_python3 snippet still needs to be changed (see comment 1)
- Please include python BRs within "%if 0%{?with_python3} ... %endif",
otherwise a RHEL 7 rebuild would fail.
- I have checked in a venv, and the tests do not get installed. So we can
remove the following line:

rm -r $(find %{_buildrootdir} -type d -name 'tests') || /bin/true

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

[Bug 1565626] New: Review Request: python-nudatus - Strip comments from Python scripts

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565626

Bug ID: 1565626
   Summary: Review Request: python-nudatus - Strip comments from
Python scripts
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: mhron...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-nudatus.spec
SRPM URL:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-nudatus-0.0.2-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:

Nudatus is a tool to remove comments from python scripts. It's created for use
in uflash to help squeeze longer programs onto the micro:bit but it should be
suitable for various environments with restricted storage.

Fedora Account System Username: churchyard

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

[Bug 1563830] Review Request: python-aiodns - Simple DNS resolver for asyncio

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563830



--- Comment #2 from Matthieu Saulnier  ---
hi,

many thanks for the review :)

SCM repo request: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5797

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

[Bug 1409138] Review Request: pixiewps - An offline WPS bruteforce utility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409138

Tomáš Korbař  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tomas.k...@seznam.cz



--- Comment #16 from Tomáš Korbař  ---
Hello,
i can see that pixiewps has some bundled libraries in itself. Specifically
TomCrypt in src/crypto/tc and TomsFastMath in src/crypto/tfm. This needs to be
fixed before we can add it to Fedora. TomCrypt is already in fedora, but
TomsFastMath isnt so it will be necessary to create its package first.

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

[Bug 1565603] Review Request: python-microfs - CLI and Python module to work with BBC micro: bit filesystem

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565603



--- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok  ---
Thank you.

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

[Bug 1565603] Review Request: python-microfs - CLI and Python module to work with BBC micro: bit filesystem

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565603

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 #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package approved.


Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 15 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/python-microfs/review-python-
 microfs/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should 

[Bug 1565097] Review Request: perl-Dist-Zilla-Role-ModuleMetadata - Role for plugins that use Module:: Metadata

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565097

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Dist-Zilla-Role-Module
   ||Metadata-0.005-1.fc29
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2018-04-10 08:00:56



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository.

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

[Bug 1565603] Review Request: python-microfs - CLI and Python module to work with BBC micro: bit filesystem

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565603

Miro Hrončok  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1387943




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387943
[Bug 1387943] mu-v1.0.0.beta.15 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 1565603] New: Review Request: python-microfs - CLI and Python module to work with BBC micro: bit filesystem

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565603

Bug ID: 1565603
   Summary: Review Request: python-microfs - CLI and Python module
to work with BBC micro:bit filesystem
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: mhron...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-microfs.spec
SRPM URL:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-microfs-1.2.2-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
A simple command line tool and module for interacting with the limited file
system provided by MicroPython on the BBC micro:bit.

Fedora Account System Username: churchyard

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

[Bug 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571



--- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-backcall

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

[Bug 1565097] Review Request: perl-Dist-Zilla-Role-ModuleMetadata - Role for plugins that use Module:: Metadata

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565097



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Dist-Zilla-Role-ModuleMetadata

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680

Dan Horák  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #15 from Dan Horák  ---
OK, the package looks good, APPROVED.

one nitpick - the Summary for docs should be "HTML doc files for ..."
(s/doxygen/HTML/) or even only "Documentation files for %{name}". Please fix
before building.

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

[Bug 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571



--- Comment #3 from Miro Hrončok  ---
LICENSE added.

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

[Bug 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571



--- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok  ---
Thanks for the swift 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 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504



--- Comment #2 from Chandan Kumar  ---
Hey Jpena,

Thanks for the review.
Below is the updated 
SPEC: https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc.spec
SRPM:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc-0.2.1-2.fc27.src.rpm

Thanks,

Chandan Kumar

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

[Bug 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571

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 #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Download the license from
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/takluyver/backcall/master/LICENSE and install
it in %files

Package otherwise approved. Please fix the aforementioned point before import.


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.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* BSD
 (unspecified)". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-backcall/review-
 python-backcall/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into 

[Bug 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571

Miro Hrončok  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1563215




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563215
[Bug 1563215] ipython-6.3.1 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 1565571] New: Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571

Bug ID: 1565571
   Summary: Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for
callback functions passed in to an API
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: mhron...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-backcall.spec
SRPM URL:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-backcall-0.1.0-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API.

If your code lets other people supply callback functions, it's important to
specify the function signature you expect, and check that functions support
that. Adding extra parameters later would break other peoples code unless
you're careful. Backcall helps with that.

Fedora Account System Username: churchyard

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

[Bug 1539291] Review Request: ghc-echo - Cross-platform, cross-console echoing of terminal input

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1539291



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
ghc-echo-0.1.3-3.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-34d8fbd75e

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

[Bug 1539291] Review Request: ghc-echo - Cross-platform, cross-console echoing of terminal input

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1539291

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 1558683] Package python-ucsmsdk to be added to Fedora

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558683

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||amora...@redhat.com



--- Comment #3 from Alan Pevec  ---
This blocking networking-cisco update for RDO Pike and later:
https://review.rdoproject.org/r/13330

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

[Bug 1558683] Package python-ucsmsdk to be added to Fedora

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558683

Alan Pevec  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||v...@cisco.com



--- Comment #2 from Alan Pevec  ---
Sandhya (and two co-maintainers) also need a Fedora sponsor
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Get_Sponsored

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680



--- Comment #14 from Michel Normand  ---
OK I moved man in *devel rpm and kept html in *docs rpm

I did not change the Source0 to ease compare with previous URL line and allow
direct access from either vi or emacs editors when in spec.
URL: https://github.com/OpenCAPI/libocxl
Source0: https://github.com/OpenCAPI/libocxl/archive/%{version}-beta2.tar.gz

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

[Bug 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504

Javier Peña  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jp...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jp...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Javier Peña  ---
Hi Chandan,

I have some initial comments on the spec:

* For the with_python3 statement, the latest Fedora reviews use the following
snippet:

%if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} > 7
%global with_python3 1
%endif

* Python 3 build requirements are missing

* There is a test directory in the PyPi tarball. I'm not sure if we want to
keep it, if not we should %exclude it in the %files section.

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680



--- Comment #13 from Dan Horák  ---
If the content of the man pages and html file is the same, then I would merge
the man pages into the devel subpackage (where usually basic API documentation
goes, I mean headers + man pages should be installed together) and removed the
docs subpackage. On the other hand the html version viewed in a browser is
nice, so it would make sense to keep it ...

You can use
Source0:
https://github.com/OpenCAPI/%{name}/archive/%{version}-beta2/%{name}-%{version}-beta2.tar.gz
to have better named source archive file.

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680



--- Comment #12 from Michel Normand  ---
(In reply to Michel Normand from comment #11)
> I updated the spec file for your previous comments
> except the man pages and html ones both generated by doxygen, 
> so kept them  both in the noarch package.

Dan is it OK or should I really split man and html in differerent rpms ?

spec and srpm updated from new beta2 upstream release (no more patches in spec)
spec: https://michelmno.fedorapeople.org/libocxl/libocxl.spec
srpm:
https://michelmno.fedorapeople.org/libocxl/SRPMS/libocxl-1.0.0-0.1.fc29.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 1565504] Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504

Yatin Karel  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||yka...@redhat.com
 Blocks||1550514 (RDO-ROCKY)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550514
[Bug 1550514] Tracker: Blockers and Review requests for new RDO Rocky
packages
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #30 from dac.overr...@gmail.com ---
Yes, It would have been less painful if your process did not pass fd's to dbus.
That is really something I dislike about dbus. I think I like varlink a lot in
that regard.

Nevertheless, I agree that currently b is probably the best way to go.

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #29 from Javier Martinez Canillas  ---
Got it. Thanks a lot for your explanations.

I think I'll probably go with (b) then. I like the idea of having independent
modules for SELinux policies but now I understand that policies for the
different components are more coupled than I thought.

I would like to go with (a), but my SELinux knowledge is close to non-existent
so I'm by no means qualified to set a precedence on this.

I'm really just interested in updating tpm2-abrmd to the latest release to be
honest.

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

[Bug 1565504] New: Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565504

Bug ID: 1565504
   Summary: Review Request: python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc - A Sphinx
extension for running sphinx-apidoc on each build
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: chkumar...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc.spec
SRPM URL:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinxcontrib-apidoc-0.2.1-1.fc27.src.rpm
Description: This package contains Sphinx extension for running sphinx-apidoc_
on each build.Overview *sphinx-apidoc* is a tool for automatic generation
of Sphinx sources that, using the autodoc _ extension,
documents a whole package in the style of other automatic API documentation
tools. *sphinx-apidoc* does not actually build documentation - rather it
simply generates it.
Fedora Account System Username: chandankumar

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #28 from dac.overr...@gmail.com ---
The CIL policy language would be a solution to this particular challenge. With
the CIL language the interfaces are part of the modules. That means that there
are no header packages. The interfaces are alway's available in the module
store

CIL provides other benefits for this modularity scenario, The thing is that CIL
is meant to be a intermediate layer, and there currently is no higher level
language that leverages CIL.

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #27 from dac.overr...@gmail.com ---
Exactly.

a. Is in theory the most sane solution I Believe.
b. Is probably the most practical solution but that basically ignores
modularization
c. Would be a short-term solution but is eventually probably a dead-end and
sets a bad precendence. You see processes interact and operate. The purpose of
the interfaces is to keep policy maintainable. If you start ignoring the
interfaces that introduces inconsistencies and eventually part of the policy
becomes hard to maintain

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #26 from Javier Martinez Canillas  ---
(In reply to dac.override from comment #25)
> Basically the way I see it is that this modularization effort requires that
> the headers are alway's installed if policy is installed. That then means
> that the various policy-devel packages need to alway's be installed.

Right, and then selinux-policy would need a BuildRequires dependency with
tpm2-abrmd-selinux-devel (and all the -devel packages exporting interfaces).
But then it won't be an independent SELinux policy module anymore as explained
in the IndependentPolicy guideline...

So I think that we have these options:

a) Due as you propose and make selinux-policy-contrib to BuildRequires
tpm2-abrmd-selinux-devel

b) Not having a tpm2-abrmd-selinux package and instead add the tpm2-abrmd AV
rules to selinux-policy-contrib.

c) Just have "allow system_dbusd_t tabrmd_t:unix_stream_socket { read write }"
in optional_policy as you first suggested.

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #25 from dac.overr...@gmail.com ---
Basically the way I see it is that this modularization effort requires that the
headers are alway's installed if policy is installed. That then means that the
various policy-devel packages need to alway's be installed.

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #24 from dac.overr...@gmail.com ---
In other words, you might get into a chicken and egg situation 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 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #23 from dac.overr...@gmail.com ---
Indeed when the dbus module gets compiled it will be looking for the
tabrmd_rw_inherited_unix_stream_sockets() interface that you export in
tabrmd.if

If it is not there at build-time then it will just not include the rule.

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #22 from dac.overr...@gmail.com ---
Yes.This is not going to work.

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

[Bug 1550595] Review Request: tpm2-abrmd-selinux - SELinux policies for tpm2-abrmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550595



--- Comment #21 from Javier Martinez Canillas  ---
(In reply to dac.override from comment #20)
> So basically you export "tabrmd_rw_inherited_unix_stream_sockets()" in
> tabrmd.if and then you call "optional_policy(`
> tabrmd_rw_inherited_unix_stream_sockets(dbusd_system_t) ')" in dbus.te

I see, so then tpm2-abrmd-selinux will have to depend on a version of
selinux-policy-contrib that contains the dbus.te changes, right?

I would also like Lukas opinion about this as well before doing the proposed
change.

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