[Bug 1854729] Review Request: nispor - API for network state query writtent in rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854729 --- Comment #8 from Gris Ge --- New SPEC file uploaded: https://fedorapeople.org/~cathay4t/nispor/nispor.spec New SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cathay4t/nispor/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01538834-nispor/nispor-0.1.1-2.fc33.src.rpm Changes: * Included license and documents. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854729] Review Request: nispor - API for network state query writtent in rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854729 --- Comment #7 from Gris Ge --- (In reply to Till Maas from comment #6) > It would be nice to have egg-info for the python module. The setuptool-rust can generate that file, but that would introduce another dependency which is no ideal for CentOS/RHEL. I will try to write a simpler version of `setuptool-rust` for this, but not a priority. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1851463] Review Request: python-django-uuslug - A Django slugify application that guarantees uniqueness and handles unicode
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851463
Vasiliy Glazov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #9 from Vasiliy Glazov ---
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". 14 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/vascom/1851463-python-django-uuslug/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.
[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:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package
[Bug 1772770] Review Request: beanstalk-client - C/C++ client for the beanstalkd work queue
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1772770 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2020-21e508ade2 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1826056] Review Request: mesaflash - Configuration and diagnostic tool for Mesa Electronics boards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1826056 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-5c8a97dd62 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1807682] Review Request: golang-goftp-server - FTP server framework written in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807682 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-577b399fad has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1848794] Review Request: lgogdownloader - GOG.com download client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1848794 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-c1212fbaf0 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1849255] Review Request: ghc-network-bsd - Network.BSD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849255 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-49aa923d00 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1849302] Review Request: golang-storj-drpc - Light replacement for gprc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849302 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-2273e23748 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-2273e23748 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2273e23748 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1846782] Review Request: rubygem-rmail - MIME mail parsing and generation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846782 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d28c754ea7 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-d28c754ea7` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d28c754ea7 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1822469] Review Request: golang-github-ory-dockertest - Support for ephermal docker images for your Go tests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822469 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:05:27 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-0c32d30355 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1849300] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-admission - Admission is a package for processing a bunch of udp packets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849300 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-13a09b8c79 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-13a09b8c79 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-13a09b8c79 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1842288] Review Request: monsterz - Puzzle game, similar to Bejeweled or Zookeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842288 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:05:40 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-9500fa522d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1852339] Review Request: barrier - Use a single keyboard and mouse to control multiple computers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1852339 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-e331a4af86 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-e331a4af86 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e331a4af86 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1826056] Review Request: mesaflash - Configuration and diagnostic tool for Mesa Electronics boards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1826056 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:05:37 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-1e9b53de44 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1815091] Review Request: python-adb - A Python implementation of the Android ADB and Fastboot protocols
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815091 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:04:56 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-f9f2a1ed43 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1807682] Review Request: golang-goftp-server - FTP server framework written in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807682 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:05:24 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-285d0167de has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1849299] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-incenc - Incremental Encoding
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849299 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-83886f20f6 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-83886f20f6 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-83886f20f6 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1839503] Review Request: golang-github-valyala-fasthttp - Fast HTTP package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839503 Bug 1839503 depends on bug 1839500, which changed state. Bug 1839500 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-valyala-tcplisten - Customizable TCP Listener https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839500 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://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 1839500] Review Request: golang-github-valyala-tcplisten - Customizable TCP Listener
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839500 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:05:15 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-884ca47b9a has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1849255] Review Request: ghc-network-bsd - Network.BSD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849255 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:04:53 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-e602d1a552 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1849384] Review Request: swappy - Wayland native snapshot editing tool, inspired by Snappy on macOS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849384 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-09 01:04:54 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-ac9ce08a6a has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1855094] Review Request: -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855094 --- Comment #1 from Steven Jay Munroe --- Created attachment 1700360 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1700360&action=edit SRPM build on F32 Cant figure out COPR yet -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1855094] New: Review Request: -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855094 Bug ID: 1855094 Summary: Review Request: - Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: munroes...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://github.com/open-power-sdk/fedora/blob/master/pveclib.spec SRPM URL: Description: Power Vector Library (pveclib) A library of useful vector operations for POWER. Version 1.0.4 Multiple (128-bit) quadword multiplies and adds. Also add IFUNC enable runtime libraries to support the complex operations available from vec_int512_ppc.h More complete description and rationale here: https://github.com/open-power-sdk/pveclib/wiki License: Apache V2.0 Project governance: modified DCO 1.1 Fedora Account System Username: munroesj52 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853888] Review Request: libLTK - Ladspa v3 ToolKit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853888 --- Comment #7 from Lewis --- Ok, I think I covered it all. The problem is now that rpm build don't work anymore. You can check it out on git clone git://codecolla.com/libltk cd libltk . make.sh This don't work anymore since I added -Wl,-soname,lib$(NAME).so to the gcc command for final so target. rpm build says : https://termbin.com/z2ye Regards. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854268] Review Request: opencsd - ARM coresight debug and trace decoder library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854268 --- Comment #3 from Jeremy Linton --- Hi, I've removed the static libraries from the devel package and added a %postun. The pagure branch has been updated, and there is a new copr build here: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jlinton/opencsd/build/1538154/ The rawhide fedpkg lint'er is still complaining about my %changelog tag despite some slight massages (I added a bogus entry). I'm loathe to start debugging the linter. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1834731] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer to Peer Cryptographic Currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834731 --- Comment #27 from Oleg Girko --- (In reply to Björn Persson from comment #26) > (In reply to marco from comment #25) > > Source12 simply downloads the key from > > https://bitcoin.org/laanwj-releases.asc without checking the hash or > > fingerprint, so there is no way to detect changes. What am I missing? > > You're missing the fact that RPMbuild doesn't download anything and the Koji > builders are isolated from Internet access. All sources and patches are > taken from the Fedora Project's Git repository and lookaside cache, and > change only when a package maintainer uploads a new file. Our source file > verification policy says that the keyring shall be committed to Git: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > #_source_file_verification > > The URL is there to document where the keyring came from, so that anyone can > download it and verify that it's identical to the one in Git. This looks too dependent on Fedora infrastructure. What about those who want to re-build the package from the spec file on their computer (and download all necessary sources using spectool)? What about those who want to re-build the package using OBS and download_files source service? I think, the main PGP public key's checksum should be embedded into spec file and checked against to make sure all re-downloaded sources are correct. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1834731] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer to Peer Cryptographic Currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834731 --- Comment #26 from Björn Persson --- (In reply to marco from comment #25) > Source12 simply downloads the key from > https://bitcoin.org/laanwj-releases.asc without checking the hash or > fingerprint, so there is no way to detect changes. What am I missing? You're missing the fact that RPMbuild doesn't download anything and the Koji builders are isolated from Internet access. All sources and patches are taken from the Fedora Project's Git repository and lookaside cache, and change only when a package maintainer uploads a new file. Our source file verification policy says that the keyring shall be committed to Git: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_source_file_verification The URL is there to document where the keyring came from, so that anyone can download it and verify that it's identical to the one in Git. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #45 from yon...@cisco.com --- One question: If I access this URL: https://pagure.io/settings#nav-basic-tab Then I can see the below items that I can configure: User Settings Profile Email Addresses API Keys SSH Keys Preferences Force Logout You can see that I have the "SSH Keys" tab as below URL, which actually displays my uploaded SSH key: https://pagure.io/settings#nav-ssh-tab However, if I access this below URL: https://src.fedoraproject.org/settings#nav-basic-tab Then I can only see the below items which do not contain "SSH Keys" tab: User Settings Profile Email Addresses API Keys Preferences Force Logout Does this mean that the two accounts have not synchronized yet? From this URL https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openosc, it says "You need to upload SSH key to be able to clone over SSH", which actually points to the https://src.fedoraproject.org/settings#nav-basic-tab URL. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854975] Review Request: python-tifffile - Read and write TIFF(r) files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854975
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
> # 7 tests fail out of 1000
Did you notify upstream about these failures?
- Uncomment this:
#%license LICENSE
- Fix the line encoding of the README in %prep
python3-tifffile.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/python3-tifffile/README.rst
- Please explain the license breakdown:
License: ASL 2.0 and MIT and BSD
I've only found trace of BSD, no Apache nor MIT.
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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised"
License". 18 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-tifffile/review-
python-tifffile/licensecheck.txt
[!]: 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 30720 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 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 licens
[Bug 1849303] Review Request: golang-storj-common - Storj common packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849303 Bug 1849303 depends on bug 1849302, which changed state. Bug 1849302 Summary: Review Request: golang-storj-drpc - Light replacement for gprc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849302 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|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://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 1849302] Review Request: golang-storj-drpc - Light replacement for gprc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849302 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-07-08 19:57:33 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849302] Review Request: golang-storj-drpc - Light replacement for gprc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849302 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-2273e23748 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2273e23748 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854729] Review Request: nispor - API for network state query writtent in rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854729 --- Comment #6 from Till Maas --- It would be nice to have egg-info for the python module. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849302] Review Request: golang-storj-drpc - Light replacement for gprc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849302 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-1d0bbf264a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-1d0bbf264a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854729] Review Request: nispor - API for network state query writtent in rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854729 --- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- (In reply to Gris Ge from comment #4) > The dependent rust crates are stored in: > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/cathay4t/nispor/builds/ > Shouldn't you open new Review Requests for these crates then? Otherwise it can't be built in Rawhide. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1855042] Review Request: librhsm - Red Hat Subscription Manager Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855042 Stephen Gallagher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-07-08 19:25:48 --- Comment #5 from Stephen Gallagher --- I dropped the %libname macro when importing 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #44 from yon...@cisco.com --- I can connect to yon...@fedorapeople.org via ssh successfully, but failed to connect to pkgs.fedoraproject.org via ssh: [rtd@bxb-rtd-vm20 fedora-review-dir]$ ssh -vv yon...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org OpenSSH_8.1p1, OpenSSL 1.1.1d FIPS 10 Sep 2019 debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config.d/05-redhat.conf debug2: checking match for 'final all' host pkgs.fedoraproject.org originally pkgs.fedoraproject.org debug2: match not found debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/crypto-policies/back-ends/openssh.config debug1: configuration requests final Match pass debug1: re-parsing configuration debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config.d/05-redhat.conf debug2: checking match for 'final all' host pkgs.fedoraproject.org originally pkgs.fedoraproject.org debug2: match found debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/crypto-policies/back-ends/openssh.config debug2: resolving "pkgs.fedoraproject.org" port 22 debug2: ssh_connect_direct debug1: Connecting to pkgs.fedoraproject.org [38.145.60.17] port 22. debug1: connect to address 38.145.60.17 port 22: Connection timed out ssh: connect to host pkgs.fedoraproject.org port 22: Connection timed out [rtd@bxb-rtd-vm20 fedora-review-dir]$ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1855042] Review Request: librhsm - Red Hat Subscription Manager Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855042 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/librhsm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1834731] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer to Peer Cryptographic Currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834731 --- Comment #25 from marco --- > packagers must be very careful when a release-signing key changes Source12 simply downloads the key from https://bitcoin.org/laanwj-releases.asc without checking the hash or fingerprint, so there is no way to detect changes. What am I missing? > To my slight surprise I found that the tarball from Github is identical to > the one on bitcoin.org (and on bitcoincore.org) I think this is only a coincidence for the 0.20.0 release. All other releases should not match, which is why I assumed the download sources are identical. > I don't see any statement that Hockeypuck has a solution to the spam attack Good point, personally I can recommend https://keys.openpgp.org/vks/v1/by-fingerprint/01EA5486DE18A882D4C2684590C8019E36C2E964, which claim to be resistant to those attacks ( https://keys.openpgp.org/about/faq#sks-pool ) Not sure, but keyserver.ubuntu.com might have solved the attack by disabling key updates, which could lead to problems should the key ever be revoked. Though generally, as long as the fingerprint matches, it should be possible to download the key from any source with reliable uptime. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1855042] Review Request: librhsm - Red Hat Subscription Manager Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855042 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Neal Gompa --- Review notes: * Conforms to Fedora Packaging Guidelines * Builds and installs cleanly * No major issues from rpmlint * License is correctly identified and license file is installed properly 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 1855042] Review Request: librhsm - Red Hat Subscription Manager Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855042
--- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa ---
> %global libname rhsm
>
> Name: lib%{libname}
> [...]
> %{_includedir}/%{libname}/
The %libname macro doesn't seem very useful. I'd suggest that you eliminate the
macro and just replace that with the name itself.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1855042] Review Request: librhsm - Red Hat Subscription Manager Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855042 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Taking this 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #43 from yon...@cisco.com --- oh, my bad. it should be fedorapeople.org, not fedoraproject.org. Now this ssh connection to fedorapeople.org issue is fixed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1855042] New: Review Request: librhsm - Red Hat Subscription Manager Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855042 Bug ID: 1855042 Summary: Review Request: librhsm - Red Hat Subscription Manager Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sgall...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/librhsm/librhsm.spec SRPM URL: https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/librhsm/librhsm-0.0.3-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: Red Hat Subscription Manager Library Fedora Account System Username: sgallagh -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #42 from yon...@cisco.com --- Also I am trying to connect to fedoraproject.org via SSH. I have generated public key pairs via ssh-keygen, and uploaded my ~/.ssh/id_rsa.pub into my FAS account. [rtd@bxb-rtd-vm20 fedora-scm]$ ssh -i ~/.ssh/id_rsa yon...@fedoraproject.org The authenticity of host 'fedoraproject.org (2604:1580:fe00:0:dead:beef:cafe:fed1)' can't be established. RSA key fingerprint is SHA256:2GMEV/jRPneOKXFUrveDO0iwWhK9Dd5Ob1wQXUEWzoA. Are you sure you want to continue connecting (yes/no/[fingerprint])? yes Warning: Permanently added 'fedoraproject.org,2604:1580:fe00:0:dead:beef:cafe:fed1' (RSA) to the list of known hosts. yon...@fedoraproject.org: Permission denied (publickey). [rtd@bxb-rtd-vm20 fedora-scm]$ I wonder why it says "Permission denied (publickey)". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1834731] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer to Peer Cryptographic Currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834731 --- Comment #24 from Björn Persson --- (In reply to marco from comment #23) > If you fetch the key from the same website the binaries are taken from, > there is no security. Anyone replacing the binaries can trivially replace > the key. That would be true if the upstream project would generate a new key for every release, and also wouldn't sign their keys. When a new release is signed with the same key that the developers have been using for years, then that increases our confidence that it is from the same source as all the previous releases. When a key needs replacing, then the project can maintain continuity by signing the new key with the old key. We packagers must be very careful when a release-signing key changes, and not blindly replace the key like we replace a tarball. In this particular case you're also off the mark because my patched spec *doesn't* fetch the key from the same website as the binaries. To my slight surprise I found that the tarball from Github is identical to the one on bitcoin.org (and on bitcoincore.org). If that's reliable, then we can improve security by fetching the tarball from Github and the signed checksum file from bitcoin.org or bitcoincore.org, and verifying them with the key we already have. An attacker will then have to acquire the secret key and compromise *both* websites before they can sneak malicious changes past the verification step. > Also, bitcoincore.org is the official download site (bitcoin.org is a mirror > site unrelated to the Bitcoin Core project). In that case the URL field in the package should also point to https://bitcoincore.org/en/about/. > The instructions recommend to fetch the key based on its fingerprint > (01EA5486DE18A882D4C2684590C8019E36C2E964). Hmm, they refer to keyserver.ubuntu.com, which runs Hockeypuck. I don't see any statement that Hockeypuck has a solution to the spam attack (https://gist.github.com/rjhansen/67ab921ffb4084c865b3618d6955275f) that led to keys.fedoraproject.org being turned off (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/COEYWJBQDAWRSYNQW7Y7TD2EKEGBWOAY/) in February this year. If it doesn't then you expose yourself to a denial of service when you fetch from the keyserver. In case somebody thinks that fetching a key from a keyserver is more secure than fetching it from the project's website: It's not, because anyone can write somebody else's name on a key and upload it to a keyserver. Only the fingerprint ensures that you get the right key, and someone who can replace files on the project's website can replace the fingerprint 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 1854729] Review Request: nispor - API for network state query writtent in rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854729 --- Comment #4 from Gris Ge --- The dependent rust crates are stored in: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/cathay4t/nispor/builds/ I will add the license and etc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #41 from yon...@cisco.com --- hi Robert-Andre, I tried to use HTTP push: https://docs.pagure.org/pagure/usage/http_push.html Any user can generate API tokens with the commit ACL which reads in the UI as: Commit to a git repository via http(s). but in my pagure.io user setting: https://src.fedoraproject.org/settings#nav-api-tab I only see the following ACLS as candidates: ACLs Create a new project (create_project) Fork a project (fork_project) Comment on a ticket (issue_comment) Create a new ticket (issue_create) Modify an existing project (modify_project) Comment on a pull-request (pull_request_comment) Open a new pull-request (pull_request_create) Flag a pull-request (pull_request_flag) Merge a pull-request (pull_request_merge) Why I don't see the "Commit to a git repository via http(s)" ACL? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854351] Review Request: golang-github-gocomply-scap - A GO module of the Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) Specification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854351 Šimon Lukašík changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-07-08 16:43:50 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849300] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-admission - Admission is a package for processing a bunch of udp packets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849300 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-07-08 16:04:22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849303] Review Request: golang-storj-common - Storj common packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849303 Bug 1849303 depends on bug 1849300, which changed state. Bug 1849300 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-admission - Admission is a package for processing a bunch of udp packets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849300 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|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://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 1849300] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-admission - Admission is a package for processing a bunch of udp packets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849300 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-13a09b8c79 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-13a09b8c79 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849300] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-admission - Admission is a package for processing a bunch of udp packets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849300 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-7851a6ceda has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-7851a6ceda -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849300] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-admission - Admission is a package for processing a bunch of udp packets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849300 Bug 1849300 depends on bug 1849299, which changed state. Bug 1849299 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-incenc - Incremental Encoding https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849299 What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|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://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 1854392] Review Request: gstreamer1-doc - GStreamer 1.0 documentation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854392 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gstreamer1-doc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849299] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-incenc - Incremental Encoding
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849299 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-07-08 15:47:05 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849299] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-incenc - Incremental Encoding
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849299 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-83886f20f6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-83886f20f6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1849299] Review Request: golang-github-zeebo-incenc - Incremental Encoding
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849299 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-17373e48dd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-17373e48dd -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854281] Review Request: dlib - A modern C++ toolkit containing machine learning algorithms
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854281 --- Comment #5 from Luya Tshimbalanga --- Thank you Robert-André, I will add the missing fix in the spec/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1854898] Review Request: uresourced - Dynamically allocate resources to the active user
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854898 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-f72c87d8dd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-f72c87d8dd -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854975] Review Request: python-tifffile - Read and write TIFF(r) files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854975 Sergio Pascual changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1833139 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833139 [Bug 1833139] python-scikit-image-0.17.2 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 1854975] New: Review Request: python-tifffile - Read and write TIFF(r) files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854975 Bug ID: 1854975 Summary: Review Request: python-tifffile - Read and write TIFF(r) files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sergio.pa...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-tifffile.spec SRPM URL: https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-tifffile-2020.7.4-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Tifffile is a Python library to: * store numpy arrays in TIFF (Tagged Image File Format) files, and * read image and metadata from TIFF-like files used in bioimaging. Fedora Account System Username: sergiopr -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854898] Review Request: uresourced - Dynamically allocate resources to the active user
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854898 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/uresourced -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854868] Review Request: python-fastprogress - Progress bar for Jupyter Notebook and console
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854868 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-fastprogress -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854790] Review Request: libspatialaudio - Ambisonic encoding / decoding and binauralization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854790 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libspatialaudio -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1803223] Review Request: golang-starlark - Starlark is a dialect of Python intended for use as a configuration language.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803223 --- Comment #17 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-starlark -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854357] Review Request: golie - A client/server implementation of ROLIE protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854357 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golie -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854351] Review Request: golang-github-gocomply-scap - A GO module of the Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) Specification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854351 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-gocomply-scap -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854898] Review Request: uresourced - Dynamically allocate resources to the active user
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854898
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 🐧 ---
- Not needed:
Requires(post): systemd
Requires(preun): systemd
Requires(postun): systemd
Package approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: 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". 27 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/uresourced/review-
uresourced/licensecheck.txt
[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/systemd/user/gnome-
launched-.scope.d(gnome-session)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 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 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and
systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files.
Note: Systemd service file(s) in uresourced
[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 t
[Bug 1854729] Review Request: nispor - API for network state query writtent in rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854729
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
-No license, no docs?
%files
%doc AUTHORS CHANGELOG DEVEL.md README.md
%license LICENSE
%{_bindir}/npc
%{_bindir}/npd
%{_unitdir}/nispor.socket
%{_unitdir}/nispor.service
%files -n python3-%{name}
%license LICENSE
%{python3_sitelib}/nispor.so
%files -n rust-%{name}-devel
%license LICENSE
%{cargo_registry}/%{name}-%{version_no_tilde}/
%files -n rust-%{name}+default-devel
%ghost %{cargo_registry}/%{name}-%{version_no_tilde}/Cargo.toml
I can't build due to missing deps:
DEBUG util.py:621: Problem 1: nothing provides requested
(crate(netlink-packet-route/default) >= 0.3.0 with
crate(netlink-packet-route/default) < 0.4.0)
DEBUG util.py:621: Problem 2: nothing provides requested
(crate(netlink-sys/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(netlink-sys/default) < 0.4.0)
DEBUG util.py:621: Problem 3: nothing provides requested
(crate(pyo3/extension-module) >= 0.11.1 with crate(pyo3/extension-module) <
0.12.0)
DEBUG util.py:621: Problem 4: nothing provides requested (crate(pyo3/macros)
>= 0.11.1 with crate(pyo3/macros) < 0.12.0)
DEBUG util.py:621: Problem 5: nothing provides requested
(crate(rtnetlink/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(rtnetlink/default) < 0.4.0)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1854868] Review Request: python-fastprogress - Progress bar for Jupyter Notebook and console
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854868
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
> py.test-%{python3_version} -v pymc3 || :
If some tests fail, please report it upstream. The check do nothing right now:
+ py.test-3.9 -v pymc3
= test session starts
==
platform linux -- Python 3.9.0b3, pytest-5.4.3, py-1.9.0, pluggy-0.13.1 --
/usr/bin/python3
rootdir:
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-fastprogress-0.2.3-1.fc33.x86_64/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages
collecting ... collected 0 items
no tests ran in 0.00s
=
ERROR: file not found: pymc3
I don't see what pymc3 has to do with this package. Tests do not seem to be
provided with the Pypi archive.
Package approved. Please remove the extraneous check thing before import.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[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", "Apache License 2.0". 16 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-fastprogress/review-python-
fastprogress/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: 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 wi
[Bug 1854790] Review Request: libspatialaudio - Ambisonic encoding / decoding and binauralization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854790
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 🐧 ---
- Not needed except EPEL7: %ldconfig_scriptlets
- Fix the changelog entry to match the Header:
libspatialaudio.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.1-1
['3.1-1.20200406gitd926a2e.fc33', '3.1-1.20200406gitd926a2e']
Package is approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: 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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised"
License". 53 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/libspatialaudio/review-
libspatialaudio/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 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
[Bug 1854392] Review Request: gstreamer1-doc - GStreamer 1.0 documentation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854392 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- > I'm not sure what to do about the empty files reported by rpmlint: I wouldn't worry about it, I'm expecting that they are needed by gtk-doc as placeholder? 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 1854281] Review Request: dlib - A modern C++ toolkit containing machine learning algorithms
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854281 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- You missed: - Some MIT thing is shipped too, add it to the corresponding license field: Expat License - dlib-19.20/docs/python/_static/jquery.js dlib-19.20/docs/python/_static/underscore.js Add it to the License: field of the doc subpackage. Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue before import. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853888] Review Request: libLTK - Ladspa v3 ToolKit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853888
--- Comment #6 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
> The line you paste there, what do you really expect? (same url as in "URL:"?)
Un lien pour télécharger l'archive "officiel". Ou à défault, ajoute des
commentaires sur comment créer l'archive:
# git clone git://codecolla.com/libltk
# tar zxvf blahblah
Source0: %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> Vraiement officiellement? c'est hébergé sur une raspberry pi chez moi et
> accessible en git uniquement pour le moment :
git clone git://codecolla.com/libltk
Je compte à termes y mettre un serveur http pour suivre l'évolution des
projets, deployer, tester, démontrer, etc...
En attendant je pourrais fournir
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lewisanesa/CodeColla/ comme URL non?
Ne peux-tu pas créer in miroir officiel sur une forge? Gitea, Gitlab, FramaGIT:
https://framagit.org/public/projects, Pagure
Tu peux aussi ajouter:
VCS: git://codecolla.com/libltk
Mais URL: est aussi obligatoire, oui à la rigueur le lien COPR.
> J'enlève .gz dans les fichiers, les commandes gzip, mais ne dois-je pas les
> remplacer par d'autres commandes?
Sinon, comment rpm build sait où trouver les man pages dans mes sources?
RPM will gzip any man page in %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/manX So copy your man
pages uncompressed in the right directory and RPM will take care of zipping.
> Le upstream ne risque pas de refuser, puisque c'est moi. Je suis seul et
> unique a ravailler sur ce projet et je veux coller aux specs de fedora.
Je vais faire ça : gcc -shared -fPIC -Wl,-soname,libfoo.so.1 -o
libfoo.so.1.0.0 foo.c
Mais mettre des virgules dans une commande de compilation me semble étrange.
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Program-Library-HOWTO/shared-libraries.html#AEN95
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1834731] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer to Peer Cryptographic Currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834731 --- Comment #23 from marco --- If you fetch the key from the same website the binaries are taken from, there is no security. Anyone replacing the binaries can trivially replace the key. Also, bitcoincore.org is the official download site (bitcoin.org is a mirror site unrelated to the Bitcoin Core project). So I recommend to use the steps to verify from their download page: https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/ The instructions recommend to fetch the key based on its fingerprint (01EA5486DE18A882D4C2684590C8019E36C2E964). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #40 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- [rtd@bxb-rtd-vm20 openosc]$ fedpkg push Please visit https://id.fedoraproject.org/openidc/Authorization?scope=openid+https%3A%2F%2Fid.fedoraproject.org%2Fscope%2Fgroups+https%3A%2F%2Fmbs.fedoraproject.org%2Foidc%2Fsubmit-build+https%3A%2F%2Fsrc.fedoraproject.org%2Fpush&response_type=code&client_id=fedpkg&redirect_uri=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost%3A12345%2F&response_mode=query to grant authorization but I could not connect the above https://id.fedoraproject.org/openidc/Authorization? link. I always run into the below error when connecting with a web-browser. I never ever have gotten such message. Is this because you're not using SSH? I don't know how to help you. Try asking help on Fedora-devel mailing list. Try following this doc for HTTP push: https://docs.pagure.org/pagure/usage/http_push.html Create an API key at: https://src.fedoraproject.org/settings#nav-api-tab (full perm) Edit ~/.config/rpkg/fedpkg.conf and add: [fedpkg.distgit] token = YOURAPIKEY Then try pushing again. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854898] New: Review Request: uresourced - Dynamically allocate resources to the active user
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854898 Bug ID: 1854898 Summary: Review Request: uresourced - Dynamically allocate resources to the active user Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: bb...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/benzea/uresourced/fedora-32-x86_64/01533466-uresourced/uresourced.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/benzea/uresourced/fedora-32-x86_64/01533466-uresourced/uresourced-0.1.0-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: This daemon dynamically assigns a resource allocation to the active graphical user. If the user has an active graphical session managed using systemd (e.g. GNOME), then the memory allocation will be used to protect the sessions core processes (session.slice). Fedora Account System Username: benzea See also https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/154 Basically, the idea is to allocate resources to the active user session. Using those resources, it can protect itself (i.e. the core session processes) and it will also get preferential treatment compared to inactive users. As an example, by default, the active user will receive a 5x larger CPU share compared to an inactive user. They will also receive a 250MiB memory allocation which protects the memory of important session processes from being reclaimed (e.g. swapped out). Right now it ships appropriate configurations to update a F32 GNOME session to work well with this. NOTE: The package currently modifies GNOME systemd units. The modifications done are entirely safe, and will not create (transient) issues when upstream GNOME starts adopting similar defaults. Once they are not needed anymore, they can simply be safely removed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1851463] Review Request: python-django-uuslug - A Django slugify application that guarantees uniqueness and handles unicode
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851463 --- Comment #8 from c...@redhat.com --- Hi Vasiliy, any update? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854729] Review Request: nispor - API for network state query writtent in rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854729 --- Comment #2 from Gris Ge --- New SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~cathay4t/nispor/nispor-0.1.1-1.fc33.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 1840632] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Exploratory analysis of Bayesian models
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840632 Sergio Pascual changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1854868 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854868 [Bug 1854868] Review Request: python-fastprogress - Progress bar for Jupyter Notebook and console -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854868] Review Request: python-fastprogress - Progress bar for Jupyter Notebook and console
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854868 Sergio Pascual changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1840632 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840632 [Bug 1840632] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Exploratory analysis of Bayesian models -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1840632] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Exploratory analysis of Bayesian models
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840632 --- Comment #8 from Sergio Pascual --- New upstream 3.9.3 https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-pymc3.spec https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-pymc3-3.9.2-1.fc33.src.rpm This version requires "fastprogress". I have a review request for it, also -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854868] New: Review Request: python-fastprogress - Progress bar for Jupyter Notebook and console
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854868 Bug ID: 1854868 Summary: Review Request: python-fastprogress - Progress bar for Jupyter Notebook and console Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sergio.pa...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-fastprogress.spec SRPM URL: https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-fastprogress-0.2.3-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: A Python-based, fast and simple progress bar for Jupyter Notebook and console. Fedora Account System Username: sergiopr -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854819] Review Request: rust-hostname-validator - Validate hostnames according to IETF RFC 1123
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854819 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Package was generated through rust2rpm, simplifying the review considerably. - Conforms to packaging guidelines (rust2rpm generated spec) - license correct and valid - only sources installed 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 1846782] Review Request: rubygem-rmail - MIME mail parsing and generation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846782 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-7bd49974b9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-7bd49974b9 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1846782] Review Request: rubygem-rmail - MIME mail parsing and generation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846782 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d28c754ea7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d28c754ea7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854819] New: Review Request: rust-hostname-validator - Validate hostnames according to IETF RFC 1123
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854819 Bug ID: 1854819 Summary: Review Request: rust-hostname-validator - Validate hostnames according to IETF RFC 1123 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: igor.ra...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-hostname-validator.spec SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-hostname-validator-1.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Validate hostnames according to IETF RFC 1123. Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1847906] Review Request: rust-tss-esapi - Wrapper around TSS 2.0 Enhanced System API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847906 --- Comment #2 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-tss-esapi -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1847902] Review Request: rust-enumflags2 - Enum-based bit flags
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847902 --- Comment #2 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-enumflags2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1847903] Review Request: rust-mbox - Malloc-based box
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847903 --- Comment #2 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-mbox -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1847900] Review Request: rust-enumflags2_derive - Do not use directly, use the reexport in the `enumflags2` crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847900 --- Comment #2 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-enumflags2_derive -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1847899] Review Request: rust-bitfield - Macros to generate bitfield-like struct
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847899 --- Comment #2 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-bitfield -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854390] Review Request: libmysofa - C functions for reading HRTFs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854390 --- Comment #3 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libmysofa -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853120] Review request: zlib-ng - a zlib implementation with optimizations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853120 --- Comment #5 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zlib-ng -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854190] Review Request: rust-invalidstring - Just for testing invalid string data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854190 Igor Raits changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-07-08 09:44:15 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1854392] Review Request: gstreamer1-doc - GStreamer 1.0 documentation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854392 Wim Taymans changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wtaym...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Wim Taymans --- Thanks for review, updated spec and srpm are available now: Spec URL: https://people.freedesktop.org/~wtay/SPECS/gstreamer1-doc.spec SRPM URL: https://people.freedesktop.org/~wtay/SRPMS/gstreamer1-doc-1.17.2-2.fc32.src.rpm I'm not sure what to do about the empty files reported by rpmlint: # rpmlint gstreamer1-doc gstreamer1-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/gstreamer1-doc/html/assets/templates/navbar_center.html gstreamer1-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/gstreamer1-doc/html/assets/templates/stylesheets.html gstreamer1-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/GStreamer-1.0/assets/templates/navbar_center.html gstreamer1-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/GStreamer-1.0/assets/templates/stylesheets.html 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1807365] Review Request: nuspell - Free and open source C++ spell checking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807365 --- Comment #16 from Pander --- Meanwhile, version 3.1.2 has been released. Please upgrade FRP to use that version. Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1854790] New: Review Request: libspatialaudio - Ambisonic encoding / decoding and binauralization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1854790 Bug ID: 1854790 Summary: Review Request: libspatialaudio - Ambisonic encoding / decoding and binauralization library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: kwiz...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://dl.kwizart.net/review/libspatialaudio.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.kwizart.net/review/libspatialaudio-3.1-1.20200406gitd926a2e.fc31.src.rpm Description: Ambisonic encoding / decoding and binauralization library Fedora Account System Username: kwizart -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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
