[Bug 1415612] Review Request: sqlrelay - Database proxy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1415612 --- Comment #12 from David Muse --- updated SPEC and SRPM: SPEC: http://www.firstworks.com/sqlrelay.spec SRPM: http://www.firstworks.com/sqlrelay-1.5.0-1.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 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 1694278] New: Review Request: python-fastpurge - A Python client for the Akamai Fast Purge API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1694278 Bug ID: 1694278 Summary: Review Request: python-fastpurge - A Python client for the Akamai Fast Purge API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ro...@mcgovern.id.au QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~rohanpm/python-fastpurge/1/python-fastpurge.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~rohanpm/python-fastpurge/1/python-fastpurge-1.0.2-1.fc31.src.rpm Description: This library provides a simple asynchronous Python wrapper for the Fast Purge API, including authentication and error recovery. Fedora Account System Username: rohanpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1632851] Review Request: Pencil2D - create animation using both bitmap and vector graphics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1632851 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System --- Pencil2D-0.6.3-2.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 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 1694246] New: Review Request: fondo - Wallpaper App
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1694246 Bug ID: 1694246 Summary: Review Request: fondo - Wallpaper App Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ego.corda...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/for-review/fondo.spec SRPM URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/for-review/fondo-1.2.2-1.71d97ee.fc30.src.rpm Description: Find a variety of the most beautiful wallpapers from Unsplash.com the world’s most generous community of photographers. Fondo allows you to see thousands of beautiful photographs from the most recent to the one you are to looking for. Give a simple click on a picture to set as wallpaper, wait until the download is complete and enjoy! Have a simple and elegant interface, you can change from light mode to dark mode as you prefer. Fedora Account System Username: atim --- This app in Popular Apps on flathub. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1672047] Review Request: smoldyn - A particle-based spatial stochastic simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672047 --- Comment #9 from Antonio Trande --- Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/smoldyn/smoldyn.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/smoldyn/smoldyn-2.58-1.fc29.src.rpm Scratch build on rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=33820584 Scratch build on el7: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=33820666 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1632851] Review Request: Pencil2D - create animation using both bitmap and vector graphics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1632851 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System --- Pencil2D-0.6.3-2.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 1655725] Review Requests: python-missingno - Missing data visualization module for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655725 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-missingno-0.4.0-2.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 1676987] Review Request: python-ipmi - Pure Python IPMI Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676987 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-ipmi-0.4.1-2.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 1689164] Review Request: python-geomet - GeoJSON <-> WKT/WKB conversion utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1689164 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-geomet-0.2.0-1.post2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1694231] New: Review Request: libunarr - A decompression library for rar, tar and zip archives
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1694231 Bug ID: 1694231 Summary: Review Request: libunarr - A decompression library for rar, tar and zip archives Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ego.corda...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/for-review/libunarr.spec SRPM URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/for-review/libunarr-1.0.1-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: A decompression library for rar, tar and zip archives. Fedora Account System Username: atim -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1689397] Review Request: trellis - Lattice ECP5 FPGA bitstream creation/analysis/programming tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1689397 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:18:39 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- trellis-1.0-0.1.20190320git26d6667.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687363] Review Request: python-xlsxwriter - a Python module for writing files in the Excel 2007+ XLSX file format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687363 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-xlsxwriter-1.1.5-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1692560] Review Request: postgresqltuner - Script to analyze PostgreSQL database configuration and tuning
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692560
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 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: "Unknown or generated", "GPL (v3 or later)". 7 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/postgresqltuner/review-
postgresqltuner/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 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]: 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 original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is
[Bug 1692395] Review Request: obs-service-extract_file - An OBS source service: Extract a file from an archive
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692395 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- obs-service-download_files-0.6.2-1.fc30, obs-service-extract_file-0.3-2.20190325git8ea7a76.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1692391] Review Request: obs-service-download_files - An OBS source service: download files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692391 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- obs-service-download_files-0.6.2-1.fc30, obs-service-extract_file-0.3-2.20190325git8ea7a76.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1690482] Review Request: group-service - Dbus Group management CLI tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1690482 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:20:31 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- group-service-1.1.0-4.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1691175] Review Request: R-gapminder - Data from Gapminder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691175 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:20:11 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-gapminder-0.3.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1691172] Review Request: R-forcats - Tools for Working with Categorical Variables (Factors)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691172 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:20:10 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- R-forcats-0.4.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1691186] Review Request: python-pyocr - Python wrapper for OCR engines (Tesseract, Cuneiform, etc)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691186 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:20:09 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- python-pyocr-0.6-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1691188] Review Request: python-libpysal - Python Spatial Analysis Library core components
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691188 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:20:08 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-libpysal-4.0.1-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1632851] Review Request: Pencil2D - create animation using both bitmap and vector graphics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1632851 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- Pencil2D-0.6.3-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1655725] Review Requests: python-missingno - Missing data visualization module for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655725 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:19:18 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-missingno-0.4.0-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1676987] Review Request: python-ipmi - Pure Python IPMI Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676987 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:18:43 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- python-ipmi-0.4.1-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1689483] Review Request: python-sphinx-issues - Sphinx extension for linking to your project's issue tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1689483 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-sphinx-issues-1.2.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1690027] Review Request: spausedd - Utility to detect and log scheduler pause
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1690027 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- spausedd-20190320-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1689542] Review Request: rubygem-tomlrb - TOML parser based on racc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1689542 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- rubygem-tomlrb-1.2.8-3.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1688309] Review Request: gnome-latex - Integrated LaTeX Environment for the GNOME desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1688309 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- gnome-latex-3.32.0-2.fc30, tepl-4.2.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1693887] Review Request: python-OBD - OBD-II serial module for reading engine data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693887
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 ---
- Please add a comment justifying the patch:
Patch0:%{name}-dep-ver.patch
- Error here:
%description -n python3-%{srcname}
%{_description}
It should be %{desc}
Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue.
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: "Unknown or generated", "GPL (v2 or later)". 29 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-OBD/review-python-
OBD/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
Note: Macros in: python3-OBD (description)
[-]: 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]: 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]: 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[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
[Bug 1688565] Review Request: R-ggplot2 - Create Elegant Data Visualisations Using the Grammar of Graphics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1688565 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- R-ggplot2-3.1.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685102] python-pycxx - update to 7.1.2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685102 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-pycxx-7.1.2-1.fc28 |python-pycxx-7.1.2-1.fc28 |python-pycxx-7.1.2-1.fc29 |python-pycxx-7.1.2-1.fc29 ||python-pycxx-7.1.2-1.fc30 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- python-pycxx-7.1.2-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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. ___ 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 1665563] Review Request: python-rangehttpserver - SimpleHTTPServer with support for Range requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1665563 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System --- python-rangehttpserver-1.2.0-5.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684934] Review Request: golang-github-roaringbitmap-roaring - Go version of the Roaring bitmap data structure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684934 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:17:17 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-roaringbitmap-roaring-0.4.17-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1663348] Review Request: blogilo - Blogging Client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663348 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- blogilo-17.08.3-13.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687781] Review Request: R-mapproj - Map Projections
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687781 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- R-mapproj-1.2.6-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687343] Review Request: R-dbplyr - A 'dplyr' Back End for Databases
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687343 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:14:29 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- R-dbplyr-1.3.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687122] Review Request: gap-pkg-jupyterkernel - Jupyter kernel written in GAP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687122 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:14:35 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-jupyterkernel-1.3-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687260] Review Request: R-NISTunits - Fundamental Physical Constants and Unit Conversions from NIST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687260 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- R-NISTunits-1.0.1-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687274] Review Request: R-measurements - Tools for Units of Measurement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687274 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- R-measurements-1.3.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687352] Review Request: R-dtplyr - Data Table Back-End for 'dplyr'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687352 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:14:32 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-dtplyr-0.0.3-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687624] Review Request: R-udunits2 - Udunits-2 Bindings for R
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687624 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- R-udunits2-0.13-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687216] Review Request: R-readxl - Read Excel Files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687216 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- R-readxl-1.3.1-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1687235] Review Request: R-qpdf - Split, Combine and Compress PDF Files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687235 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- R-pdftools-2.2-1.fc30, R-qpdf-1.1-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1686410] Review Request: R-nycflights13 - Flights that Departed NYC in 2013
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686410 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:11:20 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-nycflights13-1.0.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1686244] Review Request: R-maps - Draw Geographical Maps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686244 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- R-maps-3.3.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1686402] Review Request: R-jqr - Client for 'jq', a 'JSON' Processor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686402 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:11:19 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-jqr-1.1.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685068] Review Request: libxls - Read binary Excel files from C/C++
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685068 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- libxls-1.5.0-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1648584] Review Request: golang-github-dgryski-bitstream - Read and write bits from io.Reader and io.Writer streams
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1648584 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-dgryski-bitstream-0-0.1.20190307git3522498.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684906] Review Request: golang-github-glycerine-unsnap-stream - Small golang library for decoding the snappy streaming format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684906 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-glycerine-unsnap-stream-0-0.1.20190307gitf967730.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1686418] Review Request: R-ncdf4 - Interface to Unidata netCDF (Version 4 or Earlier) Format Data Files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686418 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- R-ncdf4-1.16-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684908] Review Request: golang-github-philhofer-fwd - Buffered Reader/Writer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684908 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-philhofer-fwd-1.0.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685996] Review Request: R-dplyr - A Grammar of Data Manipulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685996 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:10:41 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-dplyr-0.8.0.1-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1644010] Review Request: golang-github-pierrec-lz4 - LZ4 compression and decompression in pure Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1644010 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-pierrec-lz4-2.1.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685730] Review Request: golang-github-nrdcg-auroradns - Aurora DNS API client written in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685730 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-nrdcg-auroradns-1.0.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685978] Review Request: R-ggplot2movies - Movies Data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685978 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:10:38 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-ggplot2movies-0.0.1-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684919] Review Request: golang-github-tinylib-msgp - A Go code generator for MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684919 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-tinylib-msgp-1.1.0-0.1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684862] Review Request: python-dask - Parallel PyData with Task Scheduling
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684862 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- python-dask-1.1.3-3.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684927] Review Request: golang-github-ryszard-goskiplist - A skip list implementation in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684927 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-ryszard-goskiplist-0-0.1.20190306git2dfbae5.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685930] Review Request: R-doParallel - Foreach Parallel Adaptor for the 'parallel' Package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685930 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- R-doParallel-1.0.14-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1648593] Review Request: golang-github-mattn-tty - Simple tty utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1648593 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-mattn-tty-0-0.1.20190306gite4f8711.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1643906] Review Request: golang-github-rican7-retry - A simple, stateless, functional mechanism to perform actions repetitively
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1643906 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-rican7-retry-0.1.0-1.20190306git272ad12.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684929] Review Request: golang-github-huandu-xstrings - A collection of useful string functions in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684929 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-huandu-xstrings-1.2.0-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684933] Review Request: golang-github-bradfitz-iter - Range over integers [0,n).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684933 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-bradfitz-iter-0-0.1.20190307git33e6a98.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1643742] Review Request: golang-etcd-bbolt - An embedded key/value database for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1643742 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-etcd-bbolt-1.3.2-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684936] Review Request: golang-github-anacrolix-envpprof - Allows run time configuration of Go's pprof features and default HTTP mux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684936 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-anacrolix-envpprof-0-0.1.20190307git323002c.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1686032] Review Request: R-svglite - An 'SVG' Graphics Device
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686032 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2019-03-29 19:10:40 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-svglite-1.2.1-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684924] Review Request: golang-github-mschoch-smat - State Machine Assisted Testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684924 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-mschoch-smat-0-0.1.20190306git90eadee.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1648595] Review Request: golang-github-pkg-term - Manages POSIX terminals
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1648595 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-pkg-term-0-0.1.20190305gitaa71e9d.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1684909] Review Request: golang-github-ttacon-chalk - Intuitive package for prettifying terminal/console output
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684909 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-ttacon-chalk-0.1-0.1.20190306git22c06c8.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685022] Review Request: HepMC3 - C++ Event Record for Monte Carlo Generators
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685022 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- HepMC3-3.1.0-3.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1649583] Review Request: golang-github-tv42-httpunix - Go library to talk HTTP over Unix domain sockets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1649583 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-tv42-httpunix-0-0.1.20190305gitb75d861.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1685270] Review request: git-secret - A bash-tool to store your private data inside a git repository
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685270 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- git-secret-0.2.5-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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 1693914] Review Request: python-pplpy - Python PPL wrapper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693914
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
C/C++:
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
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: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License". 33 files
have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-pplpy/review-python-
pplpy/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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 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]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: 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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[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
[Bug 1692560] Review Request: postgresqltuner - Script to analyze PostgreSQL database configuration and tuning
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692560 --- Comment #3 from Mikel Olasagasti Uranga --- Thanks for reviewing Robert-André. New spec and src.rpm: Spec URL: https://mikel.olasagasti.info/tmp/fedora/postgresqltuner.spec SRPM URL: https://mikel.olasagasti.info/tmp/fedora/postgresqltuner-1.0.1-4.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 1669793] Review Request: python-vpoller - Distributed vSphere API Proxy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669793 Bug 1669793 depends on bug 1667641, which changed state. Bug 1667641 Summary: Provide builds for Python3 and update to 0.8.x versions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1667641 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 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 1659777] Review Request: python-vconnector - vSphere Connector Module for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659777 Bug 1659777 depends on bug 1667641, which changed state. Bug 1667641 Summary: Provide builds for Python3 and update to 0.8.x versions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1667641 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 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 1693852] Review Request: rubygem-test_construct - Creates temporary files and directories for testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693852
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Please provide an URL: for the package
Package approved. Please fix the above issue before import.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package contains Requires: ruby(release).
= 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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 15 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/rubygem-test_construct/review-rubygem-
test_construct/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Ruby:
[x]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform
independent under %{gem_dir}.
[x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage
[x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated.
[x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name}
[x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel.
[x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro.
[x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch
[x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi).
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
Note: Package contains font files
[-]: 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 rubygem-
test_construct
[?]: Package functions as
[Bug 1693939] Review Request: golang-github-ldap-v3 - Basic LDAP v3 functionality for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693939 Nathan Scott changed: What|Removed |Added CC||upstream-release-monitoring ||@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #4 from Nathan Scott --- *** Bug 1670675 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1689552] Review Request: gnatcoll-bindings - The GNAT Components Collection – bindings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1689552
--- Comment #4 from Björn Persson ---
(In reply to Pavel Zhukov from comment #3)
> BuildRequires: gnatcoll-core-devel = 2018 <== Can be changed %{version} for
> better maintainability same for %autosetup -n gnatcoll-bindings-gpl-2018-src
OK – and maybe I should also add a comment on why I require an exact version.
> COPYING and README are duplicated 4 and 3 times in subpackages. Isn't it
> better to ship them in main package or different subpackage (like -common
> -license whatever) which all subpackages must depend on?
The readme files aren't duplicated. They are different, and are all in the
-devel subpackage as only developers might have a use for them.
That leaves the license. I'm rather sceptical to making a separate subpackage
just for the license file. Do you really think that's worthwhile? Note that
there is no duplication once the packages are installed. There is just one
file, /usr/share/licenses/gnatcoll-bindings/COPYING3, with shared ownership.
> P.S. Huge sed expression makes me scared :) but it's kind of ok for
> autogenerated files.
The Sed syntax is admittedly hard to read. Very unlike Ada. :-) I have added an
explanation.
I also noticed that the directory /usr/share/doc/gnatcoll was unowned if
gnatcoll-bindings-devel was installed but gnatcoll-doc was not. That is now
fixed.
https://www.rombobjörn.se/packages/gnatcoll-bindings-2018-2/gnatcoll-bindings.spec
https://www.rombobjörn.se/packages/gnatcoll-bindings-2018-2/gnatcoll-bindings-2018-2.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 1670656] Review Request: grafana - an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard and graph editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670656 Nathan Scott changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1693939 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693939 [Bug 1693939] Review Request: golang-github-ldap-v3 - Basic LDAP v3 functionality for 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 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 Bug 1670656 depends on bug 1693939, which changed state. Bug 1693939 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-ldap-v3 - Basic LDAP v3 functionality for Go https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693939 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |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 1693939] Review Request: golang-github-ldap-v3 - Basic LDAP v3 functionality for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693939 Nathan Scott changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Blocks||1670656 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2019-03-29 18:45:19 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670656 [Bug 1670656] Review Request: grafana - an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard and graph editor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1692999] Review Request: python-aioresponse - mock aiohttp client sessions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692999
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 54 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-aioresponses/review-python-
aioresponses/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 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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[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
[Bug 1693514] Review Request: coin-or-Data-Netlib - COIN-OR Netlib models
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693514 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - No license file, no documentation? - I have no way of checking the actual license anywhere -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1693513] Review Request: gap-pkg-jupyterviz - Jupyter notebook visualization tools for GAP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693513
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 ---
- Bump to 1.5.1, released this a day ago
- ask upstream for a license file
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]: 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: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later)". 145
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/gap-pkg-jupyterviz/review-gap-pkg-
jupyterviz/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in gap-pkg-
jupyterviz
[?]: Package functions as described.
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package
[Bug 1693512] Review Request: gap-pkg-francy - Framework for interactive discrete mathematics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693512
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: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated". 101 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/gap-pkg-francy/review-gap-pkg-
francy/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 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 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in gap-pkg-
francy
[?]: 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 test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
[Bug 1693013] Review Request: perl-Test-RunValgrind - Tests that an external program is valgrind-clean
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693013
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 ---
- Don't mix %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
- Don't package json and yaml files
- %{__perl} → perl
URL and Source addresses are Ok.
Source archive (SHA-256:
70947565ad0be3e5d0cd9aca9e1fd0cb07c873e574310e92e8eca629ec6cd631f4e62631) is
original. Ok.
Summary verified from lib/Test/RunValgrind.pm. Ok.
Description verified from llib/Test/RunValgrind.pm. Ok.
License verified from lib/Test/RunValgrind.pm and README.md. Ok.
No XS code, BuildArch is noarch.
$ rpmlint perl-Test-RunValgrind.spec
review-perl-Test-RunValgrind/results/perl-Test-RunValgrind-0.2.0-1.fc31.noarch.rpm
review-perl-Test-RunValgrind/results/perl-Test-RunValgrind-0.2.0-1.fc31.src.rpm
perl-Test-RunValgrind.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) valgrind -> val
grind, val-grind, Valerian
perl-Test-RunValgrind.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US valgrind
-> val grind, val-grind, Valerian
perl-Test-RunValgrind.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US manpage
-> manage, man page, man-page
perl-Test-RunValgrind.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) valgrind -> val
grind, val-grind, Valerian
perl-Test-RunValgrind.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US valgrind ->
val grind, val-grind, Valerian
perl-Test-RunValgrind.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US manpage ->
manage, man page, man-page
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
$ rpm -q -lv -p perl-Test-RunValgrind-0.2.0-1.fc31.noarch.rpm
17:18:32
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Mar 29 17:10
/usr/share/doc/perl-Test-RunValgrind
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 631 Jan 26 2018
/usr/share/doc/perl-Test-RunValgrind/Changes
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot16603 Jan 26 2018
/usr/share/doc/perl-Test-RunValgrind/META.json
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot10385 Jan 26 2018
/usr/share/doc/perl-Test-RunValgrind/META.yml
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot10385 Mar 29 17:10
/usr/share/doc/perl-Test-RunValgrind/MYMETA.yml
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 318 Jan 26 2018
/usr/share/doc/perl-Test-RunValgrind/README
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Mar 29 17:10
/usr/share/licenses/perl-Test-RunValgrind
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1158 Jan 26 2018
/usr/share/licenses/perl-Test-RunValgrind/LICENSE
-r--r--r--1 rootroot 4156 Mar 29 17:10
/usr/share/man/man3/Test::RunValgrind.3pm.gz
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Mar 29 17:10
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Test
-r--r--r--1 rootroot 8103 Mar 29 17:10
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Test/RunValgrind.pm
File permissions and layout are Ok.
$ rpm -q --requires -p perl-Test-RunValgrind-0.2.0-1.fc31.noarch.rpm | sort -f
| uniq -c
1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.28.1)
1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.14.0
1 perl(Carp)
1 perl(Path::Tiny)
1 perl(strict)
1 perl(Test::More)
1 perl(Test::Trap)
1 perl(warnings)
1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Binary requires are Ok.
rpm -q --provides -p perl-Test-RunValgrind-0.2.0-1.fc31.noarch.rpm
perl(Test::RunValgrind) = 0.2.0
perl-Test-RunValgrind = 0.2.0-1.fc31
Binary provides are Ok.
Package builds in Koji
(https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=33816549).
Ok
Resolution: Package approved.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1692560] Review Request: postgresqltuner - Script to analyze PostgreSQL database configuration and tuning
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692560
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Use macros and better name for your archive:
Source0:
https://github.com/jfcoz/postgresqltuner/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
- use perl() for all your dep please:
Requires: perl(DBI)
Requires: perl(DBD::Pg)
Requires: perl(Term::ANSIColor)
- Add all BR:
Requires: perl(Getopt::Long)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 658754] Review Request: cubrid - a very fast and reliable open source SQL database server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658754 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- 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 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 658754] Review Request: cubrid - a very fast and reliable open source SQL database server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658754 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|lemen...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flags|fedora-review? | -- 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 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 1693604] Review Request: falkon-pdfreader - PDF reader extension for Falkon using pdf.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693604 Vasiliy Glazov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2019-03-29 13:41:28 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1693939] Review Request: golang-github-ldap-v3 - Basic LDAP v3 functionality for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693939 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-ldap-v3 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1693604] Review Request: falkon-pdfreader - PDF reader extension for Falkon using pdf.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693604 --- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/falkon-pdfreader -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1692190] Review Request: ccls - C/C++/ObjC language server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692190 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ccls -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1693987] Review Request: java-latest-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693987 --- Comment #2 from Petra Alice Mikova --- rpms that I built on my system are here: https://pmikova.fedorapeople.org/java-latest-openjdk/build/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1693987] Review Request: java-latest-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693987 jiri vanek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jva...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jva...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from jiri vanek --- Please, can you attach the build if you have some 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 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 1692584] Review Request: mythes-de - German thesaurus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692584 --- Comment #2 from Robert Scheck --- Thank you very much for the review! Unretiring has been requested using ticket mentioned initially. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1693887] Review Request: python-OBD - OBD-II serial module for reading engine data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693887 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1694033 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1694033 [Bug 1694033] update to 0.7 or later -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1692584] Review Request: mythes-de - German thesaurus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692584
Caolan McNamara changed:
What|Removed |Added
External Bug ID||Red Hat Bugzilla 404001
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Caolan McNamara ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= 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.
[-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[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 51200 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: 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]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[-]: 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 original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
---
Checking: mythes-de-0.20190325-1.fc29.noarch.rpm
[Bug 1692584] Review Request: mythes-de - German thesaurus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692584 Caolan McNamara changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||caol...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|caol...@redhat.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 1693987] New: Review Request: java-latest-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693987 Bug ID: 1693987 Summary: Review Request: java-latest-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: pmik...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://pmikova.fedorapeople.org/java-latest-openjdk/java-latest-openjdk.spec SRPM URL: https://pmikova.fedorapeople.org/java-latest-openjdk/java-latest-openjdk-12.0.0.33-3.rolling.fc31.src.rpm Description: OpenJDK has release cadence of 6 months, but 3/4 of them are Short Term Supported for 6 months only. This package is designed to harbor them. Currently it is build of OpenJDK 12. LTSs will be released also as separate packages. Fedora Account System Username: pmikova -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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
