date:20191119

[Bug 1672978] Review Request: python-collectd_puppet - Publishes puppet status to collectd

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672978

Steve Traylen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed||2019-11-20 07:46:10



--- Comment #5 from Steve Traylen  ---
Released some time ago.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572826] Review Request: python-Pallets-Sphinx-Themes - Sphinx themes for Pallets and related projects

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572826

Thomas Moschny  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(rel...@redhat.com
   ||)



--- Comment #14 from Thomas Moschny  ---
Ping?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1771769] Review Request: selenium-geckodriver - Geckodriver for for Selenium

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1771769



--- Comment #3 from Luya Tshimbalanga  ---
Rename selenium-geckodriver to simply geckodriver like the upstream.

Get the source package like
Source0: %{url}/archive/%{version}/geckodriver-%{version}.tar.gz

where URL: https://github.com/mozilla/geckodriver/releases

Use %autosetup which is the equivalent of %setup -q

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1771769] Review Request: selenium-geckodriver - Geckodriver for for Selenium

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1771769

Luya Tshimbalanga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|luya_...@thefinalzone.net
  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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1771769] Review Request: selenium-geckodriver - Geckodriver for for Selenium

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1771769

Luya Tshimbalanga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||luya_...@thefinalzone.net



--- Comment #2 from Luya Tshimbalanga  ---
Please take: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1771173

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1765729] Review Request: gap-pkg-format - Formations of finite solvable groups

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765729

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2019-166603c4a4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-166603c4a4

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1733023] Review Request: python-pvc - Python vSphere Client with a dialog interface

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1733023

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-pvc-0.3.0-5.el8, python-tabulate-0.8.3-8.el8,
python-vconnector-0.6.0-1.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-4ff7a96fa8

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1723052] Review Request: python-geopy - A Python client for several popular geocoding web services

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1723052

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2019-11-20 03:49:46



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-geopy-1.20.0-2.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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1689277] Review Request: make-it-quick - A simple auto-configuring make-only build system

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1689277



--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System  ---
make-it-quick-0.2.5-1.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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1209809] Review Request: rubyripper - cdparanoia based high quality cd ripper

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209809

benja...@bgroberts.id.au  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(Benjamin@BGRobert |
   |s.id.au)|



--- Comment #4 from benja...@bgroberts.id.au  ---
No problem! From memory there’s some additional problems with the package now,
and I’m not working as frequently on Fedora so probably don’t have the
requisite attention to maintain the package. Thanks for the offer and should I
move back to using this package I’ll resubmit.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1767752] Review Request: ghc-text-zipper - A text editor zipper library

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1767752

Jens Petersen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||ghc-text-zipper-0.10.1-1.fc
   ||32



--- Comment #5 from Jens Petersen  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/19834
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/19835
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/19836

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1765729] Review Request: gap-pkg-format - Formations of finite solvable groups

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765729



--- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gap-pkg-format

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1150441] Review Request: iv - InterViews graphical library

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150441

Jerry James  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #14 from Jerry James  ---
I'll try to take a look at upstream's code sometime, but I'm probably going to
be too busy for about the next week.  Perhaps when I am feeling fat and full of
turkey... :-)

No need to wait for that, though.  You've got things in acceptable shape.  This
package is APPROVED.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1765729] Review Request: gap-pkg-format - Formations of finite solvable groups

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765729



--- Comment #3 from Jerry James  ---
Thank you, Ankur!  I will let upstream know about the license.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1700438] Review Request: yq - a lightweight and portable command-line YAML processor

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1700438



--- Comment #4 from bnda...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Dusty Mabe from comment #2)
> hey bndabbs you closed this. Do you still want it in fedora? I'd like to
> have it in Fedora too.

It would be great to have it in Fedora. I just didn't have to time to be a
maintainer for it due to some changes in my full-time role.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1700438] Review Request: yq - a lightweight and portable command-line YAML processor

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1700438

bnda...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(bnda...@gmail.com |
   |)   |



--- Comment #3 from bnda...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Dusty Mabe from comment #2)
> hey bndabbs you closed this. Do you still want it in fedora? I'd like to
> have it in Fedora too.

It would be great to have it in Fedora. I just didn't have to time to be a
maintainer for it due to some changes in my full-time role.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1700438] Review Request: yq - a lightweight and portable command-line YAML processor

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1700438

Dusty Mabe  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||dustym...@redhat.com
  Flags||needinfo?(bnda...@gmail.com
   ||)



--- Comment #2 from Dusty Mabe  ---
hey bndabbs you closed this. Do you still want it in fedora? I'd like to have
it in Fedora too.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1748956] Review Request: python-dateparser - A Python parser for human readable dates

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1748956



--- Comment #12 from Fabian Affolter  ---
Thanks for your comment.


* Thu Nov 19 2019 Fabian Affolter  - 0.7.2-4
- Fix license tag (rhbz#1748956)

Update files:
Spec URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-dateparser.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-dateparser-0.7.2-4.fc31.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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772578] Review Request: python-importlib-resources - Read resources from Python packages

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772578

Boris Ranto  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #4 from Boris Ranto  ---
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: "Apache License (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "*No
 copyright* Apache License". 32 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in /home/branto/1772578-python-importlib-
 resources/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 must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No

[Bug 1772623] Review Request: erlang-unicode_util_compat - A unicode_util compatibility library for Erlang < 20

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772623

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772684] Review Request: erlang-p1_acme - ACME client library for Erlang

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772684

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772637] Review Request: erlang-idna - Erlang IDNA lib

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772637

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1748530] Review Request: erlang-yconf - YAML configuration processor

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1748530

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7d35d80acd

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1774194] Review Request: nodejs-pg-numeric - A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a string

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774194

Tom Hughes  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||956806 (nodejs-reviews),
   ||1771745
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1771745
[Bug 1771745] nodejs-pg-types-3.0.0 is available
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1774194] Review Request: nodejs-pg-numeric - A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a string

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774194



--- Comment #1 from Tom Hughes  ---
This package built on koji: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=39105170

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1774194] New: Review Request: nodejs-pg-numeric - A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a string

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774194

Bug ID: 1774194
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-pg-numeric - A reader for the
PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing
a string
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: t...@compton.nu
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora




Spec URL: https://tomh.fedorapeople.org//nodejs-pg-numeric.spec
SRPM URL: https://tomh.fedorapeople.org//nodejs-pg-numeric-1.0.2-1.fc31.src.rpm

Description:
A reader for the PostgreSQL binary format for numeric values, producing a
string.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1770961] Review Request: mirrorlist-server - Mirrorlist Server

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1770961

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2019-48a3fc7eb5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-48a3fc7eb5

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1733023] Review Request: python-pvc - Python vSphere Client with a dialog interface

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1733023

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2019-4ff7a96fa8 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-4ff7a96fa8

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772578] Review Request: python-importlib-resources - Read resources from Python packages

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772578



--- Comment #3 from Ken Dreyer (Red Hat)  ---
Whoops, that fedora-review command should include the flag for EPEL 8. Here's
the correct command to run: "fedora-review -b 1772578 -m epel-8-x86_64"

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772578] Review Request: python-importlib-resources - Read resources from Python packages

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772578



--- Comment #2 from Ken Dreyer (Red Hat)  ---
Here are the current package review guidelines:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/

Here is an easy way to start reviewing this package: "fedora-review -b 1772578"

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772387] Review Request: python3-m2crypto - Support for using OpenSSL in Python scripts

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772387

Germano Massullo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Component|Package Review  |Package Review
Version|rawhide |epel7
Product|Fedora  |Fedora EPEL



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772387] Review Request: python3-m2crypto - Support for using OpenSSL in Python scripts

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772387

Germano Massullo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Germano Massullo  ---
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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772387] Review Request: python3-m2crypto - Support for using OpenSSL in Python scripts

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772387



--- Comment #2 from Germano Massullo  ---
EPEL-7 fedora-review form filled

Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
 BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT (Old Style, legal disclaimer)",
 "Expat License", "OpenSSL License", "BSD (unspecified)". 258 files
 have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/caterpillar/python3-m2crypto/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: 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 40960 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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]: 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

[Bug 1677989] Review Request: vcglib Visualization and Computer Graphics Library

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677989

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|sanjay.an...@gmail.com  |zebo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #36 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Revalidating.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1773884] Review Request: perl-Object-HashBase - Build hash-based classes

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773884



--- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar  ---
The Koji build task fails with "BuildError: package perl-Object-HashBase not in
list for tag f32-updates-candidate" even after an hour. It seems Koji white
list was not properly updated. .

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1752139] Review Request: ucblogo - logo programming language

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752139

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
  Flags|fedora-review+  |fedora-review?




Referenced Bugs:

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

[Bug 1752139] Review Request: ucblogo - logo programming language

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752139

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #15 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Sponsored + refreshing flag.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1519834] Review Request: BOUT++ - Computational fluid simulation library for curvi-linear geometries

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519834

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #10 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Sponsored + refreshing flag

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1519834] Review Request: BOUT++ - Computational fluid simulation library for curvi-linear geometries

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519834

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
  Flags|fedora-review+  |fedora-review?




Referenced Bugs:

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

[Bug 1773884] Review Request: perl-Object-HashBase - Build hash-based classes

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773884

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Object-HashBase-0.008-
   ||1.fc32



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

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1774098] Review Request: gitfs - 0.5.2

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774098

Vlad Temian  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)




Referenced Bugs:

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

[Bug 1769843] Review Request: low-memory-monitor - Monitors low-memory conditions

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769843



--- Comment #18 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/low-memory-monitor

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1773884] Review Request: perl-Object-HashBase - Build hash-based classes

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773884



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Object-HashBase

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1774098] New: Review Request: gitfs - 0.5.2

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774098

Bug ID: 1774098
   Summary: Review Request: gitfs - 0.5.2
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: vladtem...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://github.com/presslabs/gitfs/releases/download/0.5.2/gitfs.spec
SRPM URL:
https://github.com/presslabs/gitfs/releases/download/0.5.2/gitfs-0.5.2-1.14.src.rpm
Description: gitfs is a FUSE file system that fully integrates with git. You
can mount a remote repository's branch locally, and any subsequent changes made
to the files will be automatically committed to the remote.
Fedora Account System Username: vtemian

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1765591] Review Request: oval-graph - Tool for visualization of SCAP rule evaluation results

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765591



--- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oval-graph

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1769073] Review Request: rust-i3ipc - Library for controlling i3-wm through its IPC interface

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769073



--- Comment #3 from Artem  ---
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/atim/rust-crates/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01112857-rust-i3ipc/rust-i3ipc.spec

https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/atim/rust-crates/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01112857-rust-i3ipc/rust-i3ipc-0.10.1-1.fc32.src.rpm

Seems like not possible to run some tests which requires running i3 in mock, so
maybe safe to disable them?
https://github.com/tmerr/i3ipc-rs/issues/48#issuecomment-554677829

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1766842] Review Request: gnome-monitor-config - GNOME Monitor Configuration Tool

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1766842



--- Comment #2 from Jeremy Newton  ---
(In reply to Ondřej Pohořelský from comment #1)
> Hi, this is my first informal review and I would be glad to hear any
> feedback on it.

Thanks for the review!

> 
> I would suggest getting in touch with upstream regarding license. You can't
> add license file into a package from other source than upstream. 
> I see there is a disclaimer in gmc-display-config.c, but for valid Fedora
> package you need a separate license file.
> 

Yes you are correct, I should probably not include a license file.
I made a pull request:
https://github.com/jadahl/gnome-monitor-config/pull/1

In the meantime, I'll drop the license, but lack of license file shouldn't be a
blocker for acceptance into Fedora.

> 
> >%{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc}
> I guess this is used for compatibility with other older distributions. I
> would suggest deleting this line and rely only on %License macro
> 

This is for RHEL6, but since this likely won't work on older than RHEL7, I'll
drop it from the spec file.

> 
> Another thing is missing %check macro and tests.
> 

There's nothing to test so I've skipped this section. This is a "should" not a
"must", so it's not a blocker.

>  
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> Rpmlint
> ---
> Checking: gnome-monitor-config-0-0.1.20190520.gitbc2f76c.fc32.x86_64.rpm
>  
> gnome-monitor-config-debuginfo-0-0.1.20190520.gitbc2f76c.fc32.x86_64.rpm
>  
> gnome-monitor-config-debugsource-0-0.1.20190520.gitbc2f76c.fc32.x86_64.rpm
>   gnome-monitor-config-0-0.1.20190520.gitbc2f76c.fc32.src.rpm
> gnome-monitor-config.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xrandr
> -> rand
> gnome-monitor-config.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> gnome-monitor-config.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary
> gnome-monitor-config
> gnome-monitor-config.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xrandr ->
> rand
> 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rpmlint (debuginfo)
> ---
> Checking:
> gnome-monitor-config-debuginfo-0-0.1.20190520.gitbc2f76c.fc32.x86_64.rpm
> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rpmlint (installed packages)
> 
> perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
> perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
>   LANGUAGE = (unset),
>   LC_ALL = (unset),
>   LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8",
>   LANG = "cs_CZ.UTF-8"
> are supported and installed on your system.
> perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C").
> perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
> perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
>   LANGUAGE = (unset),
>   LC_ALL = (unset),
>   LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8",
>   LANG = "cs_CZ.UTF-8"
> are supported and installed on your system.
> perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C").
> gnome-monitor-config-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
> https://github.com/jadahl/gnome-monitor-config  Name or service not known>
> gnome-monitor-config.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xrandr
> -> rand
> gnome-monitor-config.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
> https://github.com/jadahl/gnome-monitor-config  Name or service not known>
> gnome-monitor-config.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> gnome-monitor-config.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary
> gnome-monitor-config
> gnome-monitor-config-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
> https://github.com/jadahl/gnome-monitor-config  Name or service not known>
> 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
> 

Looks like everything can be ignored here. Looks like you have an issue with
your perl locale though.

> 
> 
> ...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1769323] Review Request: python3-dateutil - Powerful extensions to the standard datetime module

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769323

Germano Massullo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1772664] Review Request: past-time - Visualizer for the days of the year

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772664

Ondřej Pohořelský  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||opoho...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Ondřej Pohořelský  ---
This is just an informal review. Any feedback appreciated 



Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
  Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
  packages/past_time/__pycache__/__init__.cpython-38.opt-1.pyc
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_duplicate_files


= 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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
 upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
 licenses manually.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/past_time
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/past_time-0.1.0-py3.8.egg-info(locale,, Failed, to, set, C,
 defaulting), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/past_time/__pycache__(locale,, Failed, to, set, C,
 defaulting), /usr/share/doc/past-time(locale,, Failed, to, set, C,
 defaulting), /usr/share/licenses/past-time(locale,, Failed, to, set,
 C, defaulting)
[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.
[?]: 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 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]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
 Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?)
[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 pack

[Bug 1769323] Review Request: python3-dateutil - Powerful extensions to the standard datetime module

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769323

Steve Traylen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Last Closed||2019-11-19 12:56:01



--- Comment #7 from Steve Traylen  ---

Apologies, I am wasting time here. Despite looking a failed to notice that 

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3-dateutil

and this review should be rejected.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1769323] Review Request: python3-dateutil - Powerful extensions to the standard datetime module

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769323



--- Comment #6 from Steve Traylen  ---
Spec URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python3-dateutil/python3-dateutil.spec
SRPM URL:
http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python3-dateutil/python3-dateutil-2.8.1-1.el7.src.rpm

Update 2.8.1  - no other changes.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1771750] Review Request: python3-libcomps - Python 3 bindings for libcomps library

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1771750



--- Comment #6 from Neal Gompa  ---
> Requires:   %{orig_name}% = %{version}
> Requires:   %{orig_name}% >= %{version}-%{release}

You probably don't want to specifically do "Requires: %orig_name >=
%version-%release" there, as it's quite likely that will have unintended
consequences as this package gets updated out of band.

You probably want a Conflicts stanza:

Conflicts: %{orig_name} < 0.1.8-12

That way, this doesn't break if the release goes out of sync.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1771750] Review Request: python3-libcomps - Python 3 bindings for libcomps library

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1771750



--- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa  ---
This spec seems fine, but I can't run it through fedora-review because you're
linking to html pages. Can you please provide direct links?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1353169] Review Request: python-nikola - A static website and blog generator

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1353169

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(ngomp...@gmail.co |
   |m)  |



--- Comment #27 from Neal Gompa  ---
(In reply to Elliott Sales de Andrade from comment #26)
> Neal?

Could you update to 8.0.3 and also fill out the changelog for your updates? The
changelog is missing information about your version bump...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1764813] Review Request: apt - Command-line package manager for Debian packages

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1764813



--- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa  ---
Err, I mean I don't want apt configured with Debian repos out of the gate.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1764813] Review Request: apt - Command-line package manager for Debian packages

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1764813



--- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa  ---
(In reply to Sergio Monteiro Basto from comment #7)
> - warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/doc/apt
> 
> - you preferred 
> touch %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/apt/sources.list 
> instead  
> install -m644 %{_target_platform}/vendor/sources.list
> %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/apt/sources.list
> 
> - also we still have 2 doc packages .
> 
> All minor details 
> 
> Package APPROVED

Yeah, I elected to not install any repo configuration because I don't have apt
configured with Debian repos out of the gate. If someone wants to accidentally
break their computer, I'm not going to provide the necessary footgun. They'll
have to work for it. :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1748956] Review Request: python-dateparser - A Python parser for human readable dates

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1748956



--- Comment #11 from Jared Smith  ---

Package Review
==

* License for the code is BSD (3-clause), but the spec file states MIT


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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
 upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
 licenses manually.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,),
 /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/dateparser-0.7.2-py3.8.egg-info(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/__pycache__(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed,
 locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/dateparser/calendars(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/calendars/__pycache__(to, defaulting, set, C,
 Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/dateparser/data(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/data/__pycache__(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed,
 locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/data/date_translation_data(to, defaulting, set, C,
 Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/data/date_translation_data/__pycache__(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/data/numeral_translation_data(to, defaulting, set,
 C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/data/numeral_translation_data/__pycache__(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/languages(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed,
 locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/languages/__pycache__(to, defaulting, set, C,
 Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/search(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,),
 /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/dateparser/search/__pycache__(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser/utils(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,),
 /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/dateparser/utils/__pycache__(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
 packages/dateparser_data(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,),
 /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/dateparser_data/__pycache__(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,),
 /usr/share/doc/python3-dateparser(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed,
 locale,), /usr/share/licenses/python3-dateparser(to, defaulting, set,
 C, Failed, locale,), /usr/share/doc/python-dateparser-doc(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/share/doc/python-
 dateparser-doc/html(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,),
 /usr/share/doc/python-dateparser-doc/html/_modules(to, defaulting,
 set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/share/doc/python-dateparser-
 doc/html/_modules/dateparser(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,),
 /usr/share/doc/python-dateparser-
 doc/html/_modules/dateparser/languages(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed,
 locale,), /usr/share/doc/python-dateparser-doc/html/_sources(to,
 defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,), /usr/share/doc/python-
 dateparser-doc/html/_static(to, defaulting, set, C, Failed, locale,)
[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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes i

[Bug 1766842] Review Request: gnome-monitor-config - GNOME Monitor Configuration Tool

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1766842

opoho...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||opoho...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from opoho...@redhat.com ---
Hi, this is my first informal review and I would be glad to hear any feedback
on it.

I would suggest getting in touch with upstream regarding license. You can't add
license file into a package from other source than upstream. 
I see there is a disclaimer in gmc-display-config.c, but for valid Fedora
package you need a separate license file.


>%{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc}
I guess this is used for compatibility with other older distributions. I would
suggest deleting this line and rely only on %License macro


Another thing is missing %check macro and tests.




Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
 Note: Sources not installed
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
 BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
 upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
 licenses manually.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/licenses/gnome-
 monitor-config(C, Failed, locale,, to, set, defaulting)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[?]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[?]: If the

[Bug 1769323] Review Request: python3-dateutil - Powerful extensions to the standard datetime module

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769323



--- Comment #5 from Steve Traylen  ---
Update .spec and pacakge.

Spec URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python3-dateutil/python3-dateutil.spec
SRPM URL:
http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python3-dateutil/python3-dateutil-2.8.0-3.el7.src.rpm

Diff for the spec as below.

In particular the .spec in package and above now match with the python_provide
macro in the correct
place.


 Name:   python3-%{modname}
 Version:2.8.0
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Release:3%{?dist}
 Summary:Powerful extensions to the standard datetime module

 License:BSD
@@ -21,8 +21,6 @@
 The dateutil module provides powerful extensions to the standard datetime
 module available in Python.

-
-
 %package -n python%{python3_pkgversion}-%{modname}
 Summary:Powerful extensions to the standard datetime module
 Requires:   tzdata
@@ -56,6 +54,9 @@
 %{python3_sitelib}/*.egg-info

 %changelog
+* Wed Nov 6 2019 Steve Traylen  - 2.8.0-3
+- Move python_provide to subpackage preambe.
+
 * Wed Nov 6 2019 Steve Traylen  - 2.8.0-2

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1773924] New: Review Request: xdp-tools - Utilities and example programs for use with XDP

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773924

Bug ID: 1773924
   Summary: Review Request: xdp-tools - Utilities and example
programs for use with XDP
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: thoil...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL:
https://github.com/xdp-project/xdp-tools/blob/master/packaging/rpm/xdp-tools.spec
SRPM URL:
https://github.com/xdp-project/xdp-tools/releases/download/v0.0.1/xdp-tools-0.0.1-1.fc31.src.rpm
Description: Utilities and example programs for use with XDP
Fedora Account System Username: tohojo

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1773884] Review Request: perl-Object-HashBase - Build hash-based classes

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773884

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Source file is ok
Summary is ok
License is ok
Description is ok
URL and Source0 are ok
All tests passed
BuildRequires are ok

$ rpm -qp --requires perl-Object-HashBase-0.008-1.fc32.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq
-c | grep -v rpmlib
  1 perl(Carp)
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.30.1)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(warnings)
$ rpm -qp --requires perl-Object-HashBase-tools-0.008-1.fc32.noarch.rpm | sort
| uniq -c | grep -v rpmlib
  1 perl(base)
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.30.1)
  1 perl(Object::HashBase)
  1 perl-Object-HashBase = 0.008-1.fc32
  1 perl(Object::HashBase::Inline)
  1 perl(Object::HashBase::Test)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(Test::More) >= 0.98
  1 perl(vars)
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 /usr/bin/perl 
Binary requires are Ok.

$ rpm -qp --provides perl-Object-HashBase-0.008-1.fc32.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq
-c
  1 perl(Object::HashBase) = 0.008
  1 perl-Object-HashBase = 0.008-1.fc32
$ rpm -qp --provides perl-Object-HashBase-tools-0.008-1.fc32.noarch.rpm | sort
| uniq -c
  1 perl(Object::HashBase::Inline) = 0.008
  1 perl(Object::HashBase::Test) = 0.008
  1 perl-Object-HashBase-tools = 0.008-1.fc32
Binary provides are Ok.

$ rpmlint ./perl-Object-HashBase*
perl-Object-HashBase.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessors
-> accessory, accessorizes, accessorize
perl-Object-HashBase.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US getters ->
fetters, setters, netters
perl-Object-HashBase.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessor
-> accessory, access or, access-or
perl-Object-HashBase.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessors ->
accessory, accessorizes, accessorize
perl-Object-HashBase.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US getters ->
fetters, setters, netters
perl-Object-HashBase.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US accessor ->
accessory, access or, access-or
perl-Object-HashBase-tools.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) inlined ->
unlined, inline, inclined
perl-Object-HashBase-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hashbase_inc.pl
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
Rpmlint is ok

Resolution:
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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1773382] Review Request: home-assistant-cli - Command-line tool for Home Assistant

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773382

Peter Robinson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pbrobin...@gmail.com
 Blocks||1269538 (IoT)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269538
[Bug 1269538] Tracker for IoT on Fedora
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1773884] Review Request: perl-Object-HashBase - Build hash-based classes

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773884

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jples...@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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1773884] New: Review Request: perl-Object-HashBase - Build hash-based classes

2019-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773884

Bug ID: 1773884
   Summary: Review Request: perl-Object-HashBase - Build
hash-based classes
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL:
https://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Object-HashBase/perl-Object-HashBase.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Object-HashBase/perl-Object-HashBase-0.008-1.fc32.src.rpm
Description:
This package is used to generate classes based on hash references. Using this
class will give you a new() method, as well as generating accessors you
request.  Generated accessors will be getters, set_ACCESSOR setters will also
be generated for you. You also get constants for each accessor (all caps)
which return the key into the hash for that accessor. Single inheritance is
also supported.

Fedora Account System Username: pppisar

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

64 matches

Mail list logo