[Bug 810049] Review Request: netbeans-ide - Netbeans Integrated Development Environment (IDE)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810049 anjalirawat changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anjalirawat8...@gmail.com --- Comment #189 from anjalirawat --- nice post thanks for sharing with us https://bit.ly/3hNQDiM -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1880903] New: Review Request: ghc-HaXml - Utilities for “true” manipulating XML documents
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880903 Bug ID: 1880903 Summary: Review Request: ghc-HaXml - Utilities for “true” manipulating XML documents Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: peter...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-HaXml/ghc-HaXml.spec SRPM URL: https://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-HaXml/ghc-HaXml-1.25.5-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Haskell utilities for “true” parsing, filtering, transforming and generating XML documents. Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51930456 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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
needinfo canceled: [Bug 1740415] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator - GNOME Internet Radio Locator
Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Package Review has canceled Package Review 's request for Artem 's needinfo: Bug 1740415: Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator - GNOME Internet Radio Locator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1740415 --- Comment #5 from Package Review --- This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it. ___ package-review 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 1447517] Review Request: ddcutil - control monitor settings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447517 sanford rockowitz changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(rockowitz@minsoft |needinfo- |.com) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1837107] Review Request: 7kaa - Seven Kingdoms: Ancient Adversaries (claiming ownership of package)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837107 --- Comment #41 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-8a63eb6948 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 1877873] Review Request: python-soco - Python library to control Sonos speakers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877873 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-09-21 00:00:52 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-8a70917009 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 1837107] Review Request: 7kaa - Seven Kingdoms: Ancient Adversaries (claiming ownership of package)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837107 --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-021483c324 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 1840632] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Exploratory analysis of Bayesian models
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840632 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Fabian Affolter --- Fix release tag before importing please. It's still 2. 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 1840632] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Exploratory analysis of Bayesian models
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840632
--- Comment #10 from Sergio Pascual ---
(In reply to Fabian Affolter from comment #9)
> (In reply to Sergio Pascual from comment #7)
> > Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by "binary egg". I can't find
> > any "*.egg" file in the distribution.
>
> pymc3-3.9.3]$ ls -lisa
> total 168
> [...]
> 19718328 4 drwxr-xr-x. 2 fab fab 4096 Aug 11 05:30 pymc3.egg-info
> [...]
>
> Add rm -rf %{pypi_name}.egg-info to %prep
Thank you! Done:
https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-pymc3.spec
https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-pymc3-3.9.3-2.fc34.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 1880848] Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-date - A Go package for working with dates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880848 Robin Lee changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1465889 ||(DeepinDEPackageReview), ||1828015 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 [Bug 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1828015 [Bug 1828015] deepin-api-202008250003 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 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 Robin Lee changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1880848 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880848 [Bug 1880848] Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-date - A Go package for working with dates -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 Robin Lee changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1880847 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880847 [Bug 1880847] Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-plural - Simple Go API for pluralisation -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1880848] Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-date - A Go package for working with dates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880848 Robin Lee changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1880847 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880847 [Bug 1880847] Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-plural - Simple Go API for pluralisation -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880847] Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-plural - Simple Go API for pluralisation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880847 Robin Lee changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1465889 ||(DeepinDEPackageReview), ||1880848 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 [Bug 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880848 [Bug 1880848] Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-date - A Go package for working with dates -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880848] New: Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-date - A Go package for working with dates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880848 Bug ID: 1880848 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-date - A Go package for working with dates Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: robinlee.s...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cheeselee/deepin-packit-testing/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01679154-golang-github-rickb777-date/golang-github-rickb777-date.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cheeselee/deepin-packit-testing/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01679154-golang-github-rickb777-date/golang-github-rickb777-date-1.14.0-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: A Go package for working with dates. Fedora Account System Username: cheeselee -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880847] New: Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-plural - Simple Go API for pluralisation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880847 Bug ID: 1880847 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-rickb777-plural - Simple Go API for pluralisation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: robinlee.s...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cheeselee/deepin-packit-testing/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01679150-golang-github-rickb777-plural/golang-github-rickb777-plural.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cheeselee/deepin-packit-testing/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01679150-golang-github-rickb777-plural/golang-github-rickb777-plural-1.2.1-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Simple Go API for pluralisation. Fedora Account System Username: cheeselee -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880841] Review Request: rust-jieba-rs - Jieba Chinese Word Segmentation Implemented in Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880841 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1831789 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1831789 [Bug 1831789] rust-elasticlunr-rs-2.3.9 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 1880841] Review Request: rust-jieba-rs - Jieba Chinese Word Segmentation Implemented in Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880841 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1880840 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880840 [Bug 1880840] Review Request: rust-cedarwood - Efficiently-updatable double-array trie in Rust (ported from cedar) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880840] Review Request: rust-cedarwood - Efficiently-updatable double-array trie in Rust (ported from cedar)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880840 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1880841 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880841 [Bug 1880841] Review Request: rust-jieba-rs - Jieba Chinese Word Segmentation Implemented in Rust -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880841] New: Review Request: rust-jieba-rs - Jieba Chinese Word Segmentation Implemented in Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880841 Bug ID: 1880841 Summary: Review Request: rust-jieba-rs - Jieba Chinese Word Segmentation Implemented in Rust Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: decatho...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-jieba-rs.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-jieba-rs-0.5.1-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: Jieba Chinese Word Segmentation Implemented in Rust. Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880840] New: Review Request: rust-cedarwood - Efficiently-updatable double-array trie in Rust (ported from cedar)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880840 Bug ID: 1880840 Summary: Review Request: rust-cedarwood - Efficiently-updatable double-array trie in Rust (ported from cedar) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: decatho...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-cedarwood.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-cedarwood-0.4.4-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: Efficiently-updatable double-array trie in Rust (ported from cedar). Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe koji scratch build for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51891243 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880837] Review Request: python-pytile - Python API for Tile Bluetooth trackers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880837 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1269538 (IoT) Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269538 [Bug 1269538] Tracker for IoT on Fedora -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1880837] New: Review Request: python-pytile - Python API for Tile Bluetooth trackers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880837 Bug ID: 1880837 Summary: Review Request: python-pytile - Python API for Tile Bluetooth trackers Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@fabian-affolter.ch QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-pytile.spec SRPM URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-pytile-5.0.1-1.fc32.src.rpm Project URL: https://github.com/bachya/pytile Description: pytile is a simple Python library for retrieving information on Tile Bluetooth trackers (including last location and more). Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51882108 rpmlint output: $ rpmlint python-pytile-5.0.1-1.fc32.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint python3-pytile-5.0.1-1.fc32.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Fedora Account System Username: fab -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1878976] Review Request: python-bravado-core - Library for adding Swagger support to clients and servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1878976 --- Comment #8 from Miro Hrončok --- Side note: The f33 branch is missing entirely, but the package has been built in f34 and f32. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1111691] Review Request: qore - multithreaded programming/scripting language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691 Andy Mender changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo- |needinfo?(da...@qore.org) --- Comment #50 from Andy Mender --- Hello David :). Any updates on this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880665] Review Request: python-pyotgw - Python library to interface with the OpenTherm Gateway
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880665
--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender ---
> Version:0.6
> Release:0.b%{?dist}
I might be wrong here, but I think the "0.b" bit should be a part of the
version, so the Version field should read:
> Version:0.6b0
That way you can do away with the extra global definition: %global
upstream_version 0.6b0
The Release should be arithmetically incremental and is something internal to
Fedora so:
> Release:1%{?dist}
This affects the %changelog entry as well, of course.
However, the Packaging Guidelines are not very strict about this:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/DistTag/#_purpose_of_the_dist_tag
> License:GPLv2+
Upstream explicitly mentions it's GPLv3:
https://github.com/mvn23/pyotgw/blob/master/LICENSE
Full review:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "GPL (v3 or later)". 5 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-pyotgw/copr-build-1678734/review-
python-pyotgw/licensecheck.txt
Review: mentioned in an earlier comment.
[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
[?]: 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 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 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
==
[Bug 1880663] Review Request: python-pyduofern - Library for controlling Rademacher DuoFern actors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880663
Andy Mender changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender ---
> Name: python-%{pypi_name}
> Version:0.34.0
Version 0.34.1 was recently released:
https://github.com/gluap/pyduofern/releases/tag/v0.34.1
Tested in COPR:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/andymenderunix/python-iot/build/1678740/
> License:GPLv2+
A very minor thing, but I think the license is just "GPLv2" according to
upstream: https://github.com/gluap/pyduofern/blob/master/license.txt
Other than that, everything looks okay. Please, fix the above before importing.
Full review below:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
Note: python3-pytest4 is deprecated, you must not depend on it.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/deprecating-packages/
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "GPL (v2 or later)", "GNU Lesser
General Public License", "GNU General Public License". 38 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-pyduofern/python-
pyduofern/licensecheck.txt
Review: mentioned in an earlier comment.
[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
[?]: 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 61440 bytes in 12 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[ ]: 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 p
[Bug 1862798] Review Request: rust-parsec-client - Parsec Client library for the Rust ecosystem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862798 Peter Robinson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-09-20 10:40:17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1877893] Review Request: dbus-parsec - DBus PARSEC interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877893 Bug 1877893 depends on bug 1862798, which changed state. Bug 1862798 Summary: Review Request: rust-parsec-client - Parsec Client library for the Rust ecosystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862798 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1880663] Review Request: python-pyduofern - Library for controlling Rademacher DuoFern actors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880663 Andy Mender changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||andymenderu...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|andymenderu...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1880665] Review Request: python-pyotgw - Python library to interface with the OpenTherm Gateway
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880665 Andy Mender changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||andymenderu...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|andymenderu...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 1880701] Review Request: python-hangups - Python instant messaging client for Hangouts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880701
--- Comment #2 from Andy Mender ---
All of the dependencies have been reviewed.
> BuildRequires: (python3dist(protobuf) >= 3.1 with python3dist(protobuf) <
> 3.12)
This fails on Fedora 33 and 34 (Rawhide), because the version in both is
already 3.12.6. Also, Fedora 32 ships python-protobuf 3.11.2:
Available Packages
Name : python3-protobuf
Version : 3.11.2
Release : 2.fc32
Architecture : noarch
Size : 590 k
Source : protobuf-3.11.2-2.fc32.src.rpm
Repository : fedora
Summary : Python 3 bindings for Google Protocol Buffers
URL : https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf
License : BSD
Description : This package contains Python 3 libraries for Google Protocol
Buffers
I would recommend the following if possible:
> BuildRequires: python3dist(protobuf)
Then, the build succeeds:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/andymenderunix/python-iot/build/1678713/
However, this output from fedora-review worries me a bit (see the protobuf
version restrictions):
> Requires
>
> python3-hangups (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
> (python3.9dist(aiohttp) < 4 with python3.9dist(aiohttp) >= 3.3)
> (python3.9dist(appdirs) < 1.5 with python3.9dist(appdirs) >= 1.4)
> (python3.9dist(async-timeout) < 4 with python3.9dist(async-timeout) >= 2)
> (python3.9dist(protobuf) < 3.12 with python3.9dist(protobuf) >= 3.1)
> (python3.9dist(requests) < 3 with python3.9dist(requests) >= 2.6)
> /usr/bin/python3
> python(abi)
> python3.9dist(configargparse)
> python3.9dist(mechanicalsoup)
> python3.9dist(readlike)
> python3.9dist(reparser)
> python3.9dist(setuptools)
> python3.9dist(urwid)
I reviewed the fixed version. Everything looks okay. However, before I approve
this, please have a look at the situation with protobuf to make sure that
python-hangups really is compatible with python-protobuf >= 3.12.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
Note: python3-pytest4 is deprecated, you must not depend on it.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/deprecating-packages/
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated". 34 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-hangups/copr-build-1678713/review-
python-hangups/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]: 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 expa
[Bug 1880695] Review Request: python-readlike - Readline-like line editing module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880695 Andy Mender changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1880695] Review Request: python-readlike - Readline-like line editing module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880695
--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender ---
Package approved. Full review below:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
Note: python3-pytest4 is deprecated, you must not depend on it.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/deprecating-packages/
Review: And the package doesn't. Please, ignore the warning.
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-readlike/python-
readlike/licensecheck.txt
Review: Expat License == MIT. Everything ok.
[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
[?]: 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 installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: 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]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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 gp
[Bug 1880694] Review Request: python-reparser - Simple regex-based lexer/parser for inline markup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880694
Andy Mender changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender ---
Package approved. Full review below:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-reparser/python-
reparser/licensecheck.txt
Review: Expat License is "MIT" so everything in order.
[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
[?]: 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 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 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]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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.
[-]: S
[Bug 1880765] Review Request: python-flask-healthz - Module to easily add health endpoints to a Flask application
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880765 Andy Mender changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Andy Mender --- Alright, 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 1880800] New: Review Request: rust-httpdate - HTTP date parsing and formatting
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880800 Bug ID: 1880800 Summary: Review Request: rust-httpdate - HTTP date parsing and formatting Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: decatho...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-httpdate.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-httpdate-0.3.2-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: HTTP date parsing and formatting. Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe koji scratch build for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51875117 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 1880800] Review Request: rust-httpdate - HTTP date parsing and formatting
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880800 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1880527 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880527 [Bug 1880527] rust-hyper-0.13.8 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
