[Bug 1677491] libldac doesn't support big-endian, s390x build fails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677491 Gergely Gombos changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||485231 ||(F-ExcludeArch-s390x) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485231 [Bug 485231] ExcludeArch Tracker for s390x -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677491] New: libldac doesn't support big-endian, s390x build fails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677491 Bug ID: 1677491 Summary: libldac doesn't support big-endian, s390x build fails Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: s390x Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: gomb...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- External Bug ID: Red Hat Bugzilla 1671064 Classification: Fedora libldac request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671064 Failed Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32827186 Throws error because of upstream code: #if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN /* stuff */ #else /* __BYTE_ORDER */ #error unsupported byte order #endif Original code here: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/libldac/+/master/src/ldacBT_internal.c#239 I'd like an excludeArch here since it builds fine on all other arches. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1672862] Review Request: gap-pkg-smallgrp - Small groups library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672862 --- Comment #9 from Jerry James --- Thank you for the review, Jared. How did that tab get in there? I will replace it with spaces prior to importing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1672863] Review Request: gap-pkg-transgrp - Transitive groups library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672863 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1672862] Review Request: gap-pkg-smallgrp - Small groups library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672862 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jared Smith --- fedora-review isn't working correctly at the moment for me, so I'm reviewing this package manually. Other than a minor typographical error (use of spaces on line 1, and tabs on line 4), this package is APPROVED. It conforms to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines, and is under an approved license. It builds cleanly in Rawhide. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677481] New: Review Request: R-askpass - Safe Password Entry for R, Git, and SSH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677481 Bug ID: 1677481 Summary: Review Request: R-askpass - Safe Password Entry for R, Git, and SSH Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-askpass.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-askpass-1.1-1.fc29.src.rpm Description: Cross-platform utilities for prompting the user for credentials or a passphrase, for example to authenticate with a server or read a protected key. Includes native programs for MacOS and Windows, hence no 'tcltk' is required. Password entry can be invoked in two different ways: directly from R via the askpass() function, or indirectly as password-entry back-end for 'ssh-agent' or 'git-credential' via the SSH_ASKPASS and GIT_ASKPASS environment variables. Thereby the user can be prompted for credentials or a passphrase if needed when R calls out to git or ssh. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677481] Review Request: R-askpass - Safe Password Entry for R, Git, and SSH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677481 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32826089 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1672862] Review Request: gap-pkg-smallgrp - Small groups library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672862 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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-EPEL-2019-2d7597445f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384917] Review Request: python-pykwalify - Python lib/cli for JSON/YAML schema validation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384917 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- python-pykwalify-1.7.0-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2019-7dae6fb5b6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2019-195b64fc72 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676300] Review Request: R-sys - Powerful and Reliable Tools for Running System Commands in R
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676300 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- R-sys-2.1-1.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-9db18f862f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676300] Review Request: R-sys - Powerful and Reliable Tools for Running System Commands in R
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676300 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- R-sys-2.1-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-f3707f1d76 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 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-2019-e115d1366a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663709] Review Request: vultr - Vultr CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663709 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- vultr-1.15.0-2.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 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-2019-f610a53fc5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1673854] Review Request: ephemeral - Private-by-default, always-incognito browser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1673854 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-02-15 02:38:26 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- ephemeral-4.0.3-9.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1020292] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer-to-peer digital currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292 --- Comment #45 from Warren Togami --- It took years but upstream Bitcoin is now approaching a satisfactory replacement for the reproducible build problem. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277 This GNU GUIX based build system is a very minimal deterministic build environment that results in a reproducible binary. It is meant to replace the unverifiable, Ubuntu based Gitian build system. Once upstream is satisfied with the stability of this approach then the upstream deterministic binaries is exactly what we should ship in Fedora's RPM. Hypothetically the minimum core of the build system could be packaged for Fedora so this can be built in the Fedora build system resulting in an identical binary. This will take hopefully a few months. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12255/files A different discussion we should have among the various RPM packagers of Bitcoin is where the data directories should be. 10 days ago they changed various paths in upstream's reference .spec file. We don't want Fedora shipping a Bitcoin RPM to cause sudden surprises to people who had different paths from other packages in recent years. A few ideas to reduce risk: * We should consider naming Fedora's package "bitcoincore" for those who want exactly upstream's bit-for-bit identical distribution that also behaves in a manner matching upstream documentation. It should conflict with "bitcoin". A popular feature-fork "bitcoinknots" would have the same binary and configuration files and would thus conflict with these other names. * Also Fedora should disallow any package named "bitcoin". There are multiple reasons for this including unexpected upgrade conflicts with ways it was previously packaged and also convenient way in which to sidestep eternal political fights over what has the right to be called "bitcoin". * Another upstream concern is the risk of old bitcoin binaries in the wild when Fedora goes EOL. The simplest safeguard to this issue is to ship a final RPM update before a Fedora release's EOL that simply removes the binary. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663709] Review Request: vultr - Vultr CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663709 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- vultr-1.15.0-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-de157aef3e -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-f5f5534c70 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1670656] Review Request: grafana - an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard and graph editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670656 Mark Goodwin changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(quantum.analyst@g ||mail.com) --- Comment #15 from Mark Goodwin --- Hi Elliot, thanks for the additional comments. I've added BuildRequires for the grafana/vendor golang sources that are available in Fedora, and these sources are removed prior to building. For the remainder, I've added Provides: bundled(foo). There is no unbundling for rhel <= 7 or fedora < 28 - see the new spec. Have also bumped to 5.4.3-8 and rebuilt the copr repo. Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/goodwinos/grafana/native-rpm-spec/packaging/rpm/spec/grafana.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~mgoodwin/grafana/grafana-5.4.3-8.fc28.src.rpm COPR URL: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mgoodwin/grafana/ How's this looking now then? Thanks -- Mark -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677445] New: Review Request: python-fields - Container class boilerplate killer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677445 Bug ID: 1677445 Summary: Review Request: python-fields - Container class boilerplate killer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: log...@cottsay.net QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/python-fields/python-fields.spec SRPM URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/python-fields/python-fields-5.0.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: Container class boilerplate killer. Features: - Human-readable __repr__ - Complete set of comparison methods - Keyword and positional argument support. Works like a normal class - you can override just about anything in the subclass (eg: a custom __init__). In contrast, hynek/characteristic forces different call schematics and calls your __init__ with different arguments. Fedora Account System Username: cottsay Target branches: master f29 Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32822165 Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1675127] Review Request: Stansoft - A text-based financial accounting system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1675127 --- Comment #2 from Stansoft --- Spec URL: http://download.stansoft.org/files/stansoft.spec SRPM URL: http://download.stansoft.org/files/stansoft-7.15-3.fc29.src.rpm The license has been changed to the MIT License. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663709] Review Request: vultr - Vultr CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663709 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- vultr-1.15.0-2.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-de157aef3e -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663709] Review Request: vultr - Vultr CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663709 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- vultr-1.15.0-2.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-f610a53fc5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663709] Review Request: vultr - Vultr CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663709 Carl George changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2019-02-14 20:09:22 --- Comment #5 from Carl George --- https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1210201 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671064] Review Request: libldac - LDAC library from AOSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671064 --- Comment #10 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libldac -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #22 from Miro Hrončok --- Source checksums https://releases.pagure.org/fedora-qa/oraculum/oraculum-0.0.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0e6b58bfc554c62bfe9b1d3b9afbec2eb49cc4318ec2fc3ee9e816b363667bfd CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3e85acebc70be353360fbf149af06c8c79d5a93f1ff80ac6af7e3810587bc151 diff -r also reports differences -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #21 from František Zatloukal --- (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #20) > (if this is time sensitive, let me know and I'll approve without the > checksums). No, nothing critical, but thanks! Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/taskotron-stack-python3/fedora-29-x86_64/00858645-oraculum/oraculum.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/taskotron-stack-python3/fedora-29-x86_64/00858645-oraculum/oraculum-0.0.1-3.fc29.src.rpm And yeah, I've reported that on #fedora-noc, created two bugs for infra and I am going to create one more for upstream pagure :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #20 from Miro Hrončok --- (if this is time sensitive, let me know and I'll approve without the checksums). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #19 from Miro Hrončok --- Checking: oraculum-0.0.1-3.fc30.noarch.rpm oraculum-0.0.1-3.fc30.src.rpm oraculum.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Backend -> Backed, Back end, Back-end oraculum.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Backend -> Backed, Back end, Back-end oraculum.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary oraculum oraculum.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Backend -> Backed, Back end, Back-end oraculum.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Backend -> Backed, Back end, Back-end oraculum.src: W: invalid-url Source0: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/oraculum/archive/0.0.1/oraculum-0.0.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 400: BAD REQUEST 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/httpd, /etc/httpd/conf.d (should be OK if httpd is always pulled) I cannot do source checksums now, but otherwise this will get APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #18 from Miro Hrončok --- (In reply to František Zatloukal from comment #16) > (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #14) > > The httpd requirement / dir ownership still remains unsolved. > > Actually, httpd gets installed now, because it's dependency of > "python3.7dist(mod-wsgi)". Is that enough? Yes. (In reply to František Zatloukal from comment #17) > Anyway, pagure seems to be broken when one tries to download > any tar.gz of any tag... happens even with other projects. Have you reported that? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #17 from František Zatloukal --- (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #15) > qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org has bad HTTPS, I cannot download the Source0. Really sorry about that, forgot to build it with one commit that fixed the Source0 url. Anyway, pagure seems to be broken when one tries to download any tar.gz of any tag... happens even with other projects. Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/taskotron-stack-python3/fedora-29-x86_64/00858624-oraculum/oraculum.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/taskotron-stack-python3/fedora-29-x86_64/00858624-oraculum/oraculum-0.0.1-3.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914
--- Comment #16 from František Zatloukal ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #14)
> The httpd requirement / dir ownership still remains unsolved.
Actually, httpd gets installed now, because it's dependency of
"python3.7dist(mod-wsgi)". Is that enough?
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #14)
> Also, would you mind checking this one thing please? If you run oraculum as
> root, is %{_sysconfdir}/oraculum/__pycache__/settings.*.pyc created or not?
It is not there.
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #15 from Miro Hrončok --- qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org has bad HTTPS, I cannot download the Source0. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914
--- Comment #14 from Miro Hrončok ---
Thanks. I'll run it now.
The httpd requirement / dir ownership still remains unsolved.
Also, would you mind checking this one thing please? If you run oraculum as
root, is %{_sysconfdir}/oraculum/__pycache__/settings.*.pyc created or not?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1672861] Review Request: gap-pkg-primgrp - Primitive permutation groups library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672861 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jared Smith --- fedora-review is failing, but I have manually reviewed this package, and it is APPROVED. The package follows the Fedora Packaging Guidelines, and is under an approved license. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #13 from František Zatloukal --- Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/lbrabec/oraculum/fedora-29-x86_64/00858599-oraculum/oraculum.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/lbrabec/oraculum/fedora-29-x86_64/00858599-oraculum/oraculum-0.0.1-3.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #9 from Pavel Raiskup --- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-2d7597445f https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-195b64fc72 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-f5f5534c70 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-e115d1366a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-e115d1366a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-195b64fc72 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-2d7597445f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- pspg-1.6.3-3.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-f5f5534c70 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663709] Review Request: vultr - Vultr CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663709 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/vultr -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #12 from Miro Hrončok --- That would be: Spec URL: SRPM URL: Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #11 from Miro Hrončok --- Could you please give me a prescribed form of spec + srpm links so I can run 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #10 from František Zatloukal --- Yeah, I've just tagged the release, but it seems there is something wrong with pagure when I try to download the released tar: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/oraculum/archive/0.0.1/oraculum-0.0.1.tar.gz Updated SPEC: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/oraculum/blob/89daf307421405a4ef5d3e8e87e00614b56d7624/f/oraculum.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1384917] Review Request: python-pykwalify - Python lib/cli for JSON/YAML schema validation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384917 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- python-pykwalify-1.7.0-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-7dae6fb5b6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pspg -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1672861] Review Request: gap-pkg-primgrp - Primitive permutation groups library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672861 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676300] Review Request: R-sys - Powerful and Reliable Tools for Running System Commands in R
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676300 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-sys -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 --- Comment #9 from Miro Hrončok --- Are you changing the release tarball as we speak? Was there an actual release? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914
--- Comment #8 from František Zatloukal ---
All should be addressed, hope I didn't miss anything.
I have added sed workaround for Flask-Caching, I'll package the new module to
Fedora and then remove that workaround.
SPEC:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/oraculum/blob/c55bc7065842b54da2824971621d1103143ffa6e/f/oraculum.spec
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #7)
> Don't try to provide flask-caching from flask-cache ("I'll create PR
> against that to at least provide Flask-Caching."). That would be a real lie.
I won't, I promise :D
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677291] New: Review Request: newsboat - An RSS/Atom feed reader for text terminals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677291 Bug ID: 1677291 Summary: Review Request: newsboat - An RSS/Atom feed reader for text terminals Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jsta...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jstanek/package-reviews/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00858523-newsboat/newsboat.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jstanek/package-reviews/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00858523-newsboat/newsboat-2.14.1-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: Newsboat is a fork of Newsbeuter, an RSS/Atom feed reader for the text console. The only difference is that Newsboat is actively maintained while Newsbeuter isn't. Fedora Account System Username: jstanek Note: Although the software is mainly written in C/C++, some parts are recently written in Rust -- so Rust packaging guidelines should probably also apply. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671064] Review Request: libldac - LDAC library from AOSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671064 --- Comment #9 from Pasi Karkkainen --- Great to see libldac getting approved in Fedora! Thanks a lot everyone. Btw are you interested in packaging libopenaptx (https://github.com/pali/libopenaptx) aswell? It's a separate LGPL library which implements only the AptX and AptX-HD codecs. I believe the patents around aptx expired last year.. It's possible to use libopenaptx instead of ffmpeg to get aptx/aptx-hd codecs supported in pulseaudio/bluetooth. (and there are patches for that on pulseaudio mailinglist already. patches to bluez were already merged). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request: pspg - A unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 Pavel Raiskup changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request pspg - a |Review Request: pspg - A |unix pager optimized for|unix pager optimized for |psql|psql -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request pspg - a unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 Honza Horak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request pspg - a unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #3 from Pavel Raiskup --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/praiskup/pspg-rpm/master/pspg.spec SRPM URL: http://praiskup.fedorapeople.org/pspg-1.6.3-3.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request pspg - a unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259
Honza Horak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Honza Horak ---
There are few issues/comments that I'd personally do differently, but nothing
identified as as blocker. Giving fedora-review+.
Issues:
===
- Summary should begin with capital:
s/Summary: a unix/Summary: A unix/
- Superfluous requirements?
Requires: ncurses readline
I think those should be handled by automatic requires for library. At least
for readline, not sure whether ncurses dependency is not required for some
binary.
- %license macro can be used instead of %doc
- /me not sure if supporting %rhel<=6 is worth it
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: 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.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
- Superfluous requirements?
Requires: ncurses readline
I think those should be handled by automatic requires for library. At least
for readline, not sure whether ncurses dependency is not required for some
binary.
[!]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
- Summary should begin with capital:
s/Summary: a unix/Summary: A unix/
[-]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[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 uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in pspg-
debuginfo , pspg-debugsource
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from
[Bug 1677265] Review Request: cekit - Container creation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677265 --- Comment #1 from Marek Goldmann --- A scratch build for F29: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32804986 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677265] New: Review Request: cekit - Container creation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677265 Bug ID: 1677265 Summary: Review Request: cekit - Container creation tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mgold...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/cekit/cekit.spec SRPM URL: https://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/cekit/cekit-3.0.0-0.20190214gitec3a0b.1.src.rpm Description: Cekit helps to build container images from image definition files Fedora Account System Username: goldmann This is a tool written in Python. To be functioning correctly it needs the kwalify package updated: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pykwalify/pull-request/2. This review packages a snapshot version of the upcoming Cekit 3.0. I would like to go through the review process so that the final version could be shipped in Fedora repositories. This spec file contains all code to be able to build it in EPEL too, but before it can be done python2-colorlog and python2-pykwalify packages need to be added there. These efforts are tracked here: https://github.com/cekit/cekit/issues/378 and here: https://github.com/cekit/cekit/issues/389. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request pspg - a unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 Honza Horak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hho...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hho...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] Review Request pspg - a unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 --- Comment #1 from Pavel Raiskup --- Fedora Account System Username: praiskup -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1677259] New: Review Request pspg - a unix pager optimized for psql
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677259 Bug ID: 1677259 Summary: Review Request pspg - a unix pager optimized for psql Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: prais...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/praiskup/pspg-rpm/master/pspg.spec SRPM URL: http://praiskup.fedorapeople.org/pspg-1.6.3-2.src.rpm Description: pspg is a unix pager optimized for psql. It can freeze rows, freeze columns, and lot of color themes are included. Fedora Account System Username: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1674945] Review Request: rust-erased-serde - Type-erased Serialize and Serializer traits
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674945 --- Comment #5 from Sayan Chowdhury --- I've added 'rust-sig' group as committer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1674945] Review Request: rust-erased-serde - Type-erased Serialize and Serializer traits
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674945 --- Comment #4 from Igor Gnatenko --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-erased-serde -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671788] Review Request: python-hypothesis-fspaths - python library for generating file system paths
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671788 --- Comment #7 from Igor Gnatenko --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-hypothesis-fspaths -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663709] Review Request: vultr - Vultr CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663709
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
LGTM.
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: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated". 61 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in 1663709-vultr/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[?]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: 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 golang-
github-jamesclonk-vultr-devel , vultr-debuginfo , vultr-debugsource
[?]: 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]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]:
[Bug 1674945] Review Request: rust-erased-serde - Type-erased Serialize and Serializer traits
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674945 Igor Gnatenko changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko --- Look good! After you get git repository, please add "rust-sig" group as committer. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1674945] Review Request: rust-erased-serde - Type-erased Serialize and Serializer traits
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674945 --- Comment #2 from Sayan Chowdhury --- The project release a new version, 0.3.9. So, I've updated the SPECs and SRPMs. SPEC: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sayanchowdhury/rpm-packaging/master/rust/rust-erased-serde/rust-erased-serde.spec SRPM: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sayanchowdhury/rpm-packaging/master/rust/rust-erased-serde/rust-erased-serde-0.3.9-1.fc30.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1670070] Review Request: cheat - Help for various commands and their usecases
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670070 --- Comment #3 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski --- Gergely, as I have just sponsored you into the packager group, you can take this review officially (assign to yourself) and continue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671064] Review Request: libldac - LDAC library from AOSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671064 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski --- Great, package is approved and I'm sponsoring Gergely into the packager group now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914
--- Comment #7 from Miro Hrončok ---
Mea culpa. It was no attack. I simply meant "is not true". Reminded me "the
cake is a lie" and that made me use that line as a silly reference. Sorry about
that.
"but in Fedora, the flask_caching implementation is just used in flask_cache
package instead"
This is the part that I read as "Fedora's flask_cache package has the code
(implementation) from flask_caching upstream" reading it as "the Fedora package
makes obscure things, pretending to be what it is not". If I read that wrong
because an error caused by English not being my first language, Ḯm sorry
twice. if this is plausible implementation, please change the comment to say
what it actually should mean: "We are compatible with both, but one is broken
on PyPI and the second is not available in Fedora."
But that is your upstream, I hold no power over that and do whatever you prefer
to do.
As for the current problem we are facing here, I'd suggest the following (try
in order):
1) get flask-cache fixed upstream if you can and only use flask_cache
everywhere
2) package the working flask-caching into Fedora (eventually even retiring
flask-cache if the upstream is dead)
3) add setup(install_requires=['flask-caching', ...]) in upstream, sed/patch
it downstream to flask-cache to accommodate for this unfortunate situation
4) don't add upstream dependency metadata at all, use manual requires (status
quo) but also explicitly disable dependency generator with a comment
What not to do:
Don't try to provide flask-caching from flask-cache ("I'll create PR against
that to at least provide Flask-Caching."). That would be a real lie.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676300] Review Request: R-sys - Powerful and Reliable Tools for Running System Commands in R
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676300 José Matos changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jama...@fc.up.pt Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jama...@fc.up.pt Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from José Matos --- The license is correct and appropriate. The simple file is simple and readable. :-) The only complaint that I get from fedora-review is: - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: BUILDSTDERR: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib64/R/library/sys/help See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles That is correct help appears twice in the %file section. The fix is so simple that I am sure you will do it on import. So the package is approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1676914] Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676914 Josef Skladanka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jskla...@redhat.com --- Comment #6 from Josef Skladanka --- (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #5) > That comment is a lie. python-flask-cache in Fedora is Flask-Cache, sources > point to > https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/F/Flask-Cache/Flask-Cache-0.13.1.tar. > gz and there are no patches that change it Flask-Caching. I would not go as far as "lie" (and I'm choosing not to take this as an attack, but rather an error caused by English not being your first language, and probably some hasty reading of the comment itself), but you are right that the comment is probably incomplete/not specific enough. Nowhere in the comment, I say the python-flask-cache package in fedora uses flask-caching sources, I'm rather pointing out, that instead of obsoleting flask-cache, and packaging flask-caching, the Fedora-package uses the `from flask_cache import` implementation present in flask-caching, instead of the `from flask.ext.cache import` line present in the git repo/tar.gz release of flask-cache. The fact is, that in order for the code to work, when installing deps from PIP, flask-caching needs to be used, and when used in "fedora environment" flask-cache needs to be used (because flask-caching is not packaged, and flask-cache is basically hot-fixed to work with the new-style flask imports by sed in specfile). If it will make you happier, I can, of course, change the comment to encompass all the details, but it does not change the facts of the matter at hand. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1658153] Review Request: wdune - wdune (white_dune) is a graphical VRML97/X3D editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1658153 --- Comment #27 from J. Scheurich --- | The image editor setting is in options in the GUI... | That's my point. Why is the spec file *forcing* every person who installs wdune to also install kolourpaint? I need a default. Having a unliked imageeditor installed, but no used is better than having no imageeditor as with a "Suggests:" solution. A idea would be using something like xdg-open but xlg-open forks at once, so xdg-open itself is not possible 8-( | The bundled eigen3 code is licensed under the Mozilla Public License v2.0, but we'll talk about that next. Should i use License: GPLv3+,MPLv1.1 ? | Those scripts are only executed at build time? Yes | I'm talking about tools/modify_orientation_interpolator.awk (invokes echo), This a tool to modify vrml code, but it has to be invoked by the user from commandline | batch/findcopyrights.sh (invokes cat and grep), batch/print_unused_geo_files.sh (invokes ls) the files in the batch dorectory are useful tools that are invoked at build time or invoked by the user from the commandline | and what appears to be a genuine source file: src/swt/motif/swt.c (invokes mkdir). swt.c is a C file, it invokes mkdir(3) from C | Speaking of getting sponsored, what reviews have you done? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669913 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
