[Bug 1887470] Review Request: libtraceevent - library to parse raw trace event formats

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887470



--- Comment #7 from Zamir SUN  ---
Thanks all for your reviews.

Updated in-place
SPEC URL:
https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/libtraceevent/libtraceevent.spec
SRPM URL:
https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/libtraceevent/libtraceevent-1.1.0-1.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 1897762] New: Review Request: pamix - PulseAudio terminal mixer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897762

Bug ID: 1897762
   Summary: Review Request: pamix - PulseAudio terminal mixer
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: psab...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://psabata.fedorapeople.org/packages/pamix/pamix.spec
SRPM URL:
https://psabata.fedorapeople.org/packages/pamix/pamix-1.6-1.fc33.src.rpm

Description:
PAmix is a simple, terminal-based mixer for PulseAudio inspired by pavucontrol.

Fedora Account System Username: psabata

COPR builds:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/psabata/pamix/build/1768886/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1872427] Review Request: ec2-hibinit-agent - support for hibernation for Amazon ec2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872427

David Duncan  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Flags||needinfo?(nobody@fedoraproj
   ||ect.org)



--- Comment #10 from David Duncan  ---
Okay. finally have some updates for this package with modifications in place.
Please have another look and see if we are close to moving forward. 
https://davdunc.fedorapeople.org/ec2-hibinit-agent-1.0.3-3.fc33.src.rpm
https://davdunc.fedorapeople.org/ec2-hibinit-agent.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 1897277] Rename Review Request: deepin-qt5platform-plugins - Qt platform integration plugins for Deepin Desktop Environment

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897277

Robin Lee  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #2 from Robin Lee  ---
Change:
- Filter private so from Provides

Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cheeselee/deepin-packit-testing/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01768857-deepin-qt5platform-plugins/deepin-qt5platform-plugins.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cheeselee/deepin-packit-testing/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01768857-deepin-qt5platform-plugins/deepin-qt5platform-plugins-5.0.21-2.fc34.src.rpm

(In reply to Qiyu Yan from comment #1)
> - consider exclude /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/platforms/libdxcb.so from auto
> provides?
Done


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1885679] Review Request: paper - Query paper size database and retrieve the preferred size

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1885679

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-abee504b99 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 1886798] Review Request: ghc-fixed - Signed 15.16 precision fixed point arithmetic

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1886798

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-6dbc2c2827 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 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-2020-6dbc2c2827 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-6dbc2c2827

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 1853555] Review Request: ghc-HsOpenSSL - Partial OpenSSL binding for Haskell

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853555



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-ed6f5ca90f has been pushed to the Fedora 32 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-ed6f5ca90f`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-ed6f5ca90f

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 1892155] Review Request: ghc-http-client-openssl - Http-client backend using the OpenSSL library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892155

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-ed6f5ca90f has been pushed to the Fedora 32 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-ed6f5ca90f`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-ed6f5ca90f

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 1880903] Review Request: ghc-HaXml - Utilities for “true” manipulating XML documents

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880903



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-edae7b83a3 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 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-edae7b83a3 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-edae7b83a3

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 1157162] Review Request: badvpn - Peer-to-peer VPN solution

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157162

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-69e1016486 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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-2020-69e1016486 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-69e1016486

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 1880903] Review Request: ghc-HaXml - Utilities for “true” manipulating XML documents

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880903

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-53b159127a has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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-2020-53b159127a \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-53b159127a

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 1892101] Review Request: fbthrift - Facebook's branch of Apache Thrift, including a new C++ server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892101



--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-45065fae47 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 1891640] Review Request: wangle - Framework for building services in a consistent/modular/composable way

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891640



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-45065fae47 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 1891639] Review Request: fizz - A C++14 implementation of the TLS-1.3 standard

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891639



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-45065fae47 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 1887621] Review Request: folly - An open-source C++ library developed and used at Facebook

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621



--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-45065fae47 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 1892101] Review Request: fbthrift - Facebook's branch of Apache Thrift, including a new C++ server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892101
Bug 1892101 depends on bug 1891639, which changed state.

Bug 1891639 Summary: Review Request: fizz - A C++14 implementation of the 
TLS-1.3 standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891639

   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 1891640] Review Request: wangle - Framework for building services in a consistent/modular/composable way

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891640
Bug 1891640 depends on bug 1887621, which changed state.

Bug 1887621 Summary: Review Request: folly - An open-source C++ library 
developed and used at Facebook
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621

   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 1892101] Review Request: fbthrift - Facebook's branch of Apache Thrift, including a new C++ server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892101
Bug 1892101 depends on bug 1887621, which changed state.

Bug 1887621 Summary: Review Request: folly - An open-source C++ library 
developed and used at Facebook
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621

   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 1892101] Review Request: fbthrift - Facebook's branch of Apache Thrift, including a new C++ server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892101

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2020-11-14 01:11:30



--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-53f08a8053 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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 1891640] Review Request: wangle - Framework for building services in a consistent/modular/composable way

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891640
Bug 1891640 depends on bug 1891639, which changed state.

Bug 1891639 Summary: Review Request: fizz - A C++14 implementation of the 
TLS-1.3 standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891639

   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 1892101] Review Request: fbthrift - Facebook's branch of Apache Thrift, including a new C++ server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892101
Bug 1892101 depends on bug 1891640, which changed state.

Bug 1891640 Summary: Review Request: wangle - Framework for building services 
in a consistent/modular/composable way
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891640

   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 1891640] Review Request: wangle - Framework for building services in a consistent/modular/composable way

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891640

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2020-11-14 01:11:28



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-53f08a8053 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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 1891639] Review Request: fizz - A C++14 implementation of the TLS-1.3 standard

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891639
Bug 1891639 depends on bug 1887621, which changed state.

Bug 1887621 Summary: Review Request: folly - An open-source C++ library 
developed and used at Facebook
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621

   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 1887621] Review Request: folly - An open-source C++ library developed and used at Facebook

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2020-11-14 01:11:20



--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-53f08a8053 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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 1891639] Review Request: fizz - A C++14 implementation of the TLS-1.3 standard

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1891639

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2020-11-14 01:11:24



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-53f08a8053 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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 1885415] Review Request: haproxy18 - HAProxy reverse proxy for high availability environments

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1885415

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2020-11-14 00:40:37



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-0d6230d04e has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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 1897738] New: Review Request: virtualpg - A loadable dynamic extension to both SQLite and SpatiaLite

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897738

Bug ID: 1897738
   Summary: Review Request: virtualpg - A loadable dynamic
extension to both SQLite and SpatiaLite
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: manisan...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/virtualpg.spec
SRPM URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/virtualpg-2.0.1-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: A loadable dynamic extension to both SQLite and SpatiaLite
Fedora Account System Username: smani

Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5717


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1897735] New: Review Request: libxslxwriter - A C library for creating Excel XLSX files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897735

Bug ID: 1897735
   Summary: Review Request: libxslxwriter - A C library for
creating Excel XLSX files
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: manisan...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/libxlsxwriter.spec
SRPM URL:
https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/libxlsxwriter-1.0.0-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: A C library for creating Excel XLSX files
Fedora Account System Username: smani

Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5090


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1897734] New: Review Request: librttopo - Create and manage SQL/MM topologies

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897734

Bug ID: 1897734
   Summary: Review Request: librttopo - Create and manage SQL/MM
topologies
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: manisan...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/librttopo.spec
SRPM URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/librttopo-1.1.0-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: Create and manage SQL/MM topologies
Fedora Account System Username: smani

Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5059


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1880636] Review Request: jmc module rpms

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880636



--- Comment #31 from Jie Kang  ---
Thank you Miro! Your review of the packages here are greatly appreciated!


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1880636] Review Request: jmc module rpms

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880636

Miro Hrončok  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #30 from Miro Hrončok  ---
My concerns have been fixed, all packages here are APPROVED. Sorry fo the
delay.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1762856] Review Request: mingw-rust - MinGW Windows Rust Toolchain

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762856



--- Comment #17 from Sandro Mani  ---
Ok me had an idea: I'll workaround rpmdiff comparing the packages across build
arches by adding %{arch} to the subpackage name, and just have the subpackage
provide the proper name, say:

%package -n mingw32-%{pkgname}-%{_arch}
Summary:   MinGW Windows Rust Toolchain
Provides:  mingw32-%{pkgname} = %{version}-%{release}

And this actually builds:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=55537452 :)

---

Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/mingw-rust.spec
SRPM URL:
https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/mingw-rust-1.47.0-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: MinGW Windows Rust Toolchain
Fedora Account System Username: smani


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1881482] Review Request: intel-ipp-crypto-mb - Intel(R) IPP Cryptography multi-buffer library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881482



--- Comment #5 from Andrey Matyukov  ---
Thanks for the review, Petr.

I've updated SPEC/SRPM and fixed most of your findings.

As to the URL, you are right, it has to point to the tagged commit, so now it
points to the latest release, which was out recently and contains all required
changes.

The only thing that might look unusual for you is the reference to the doc in
the description, that points to the doc located deep inside the source tree
under %{url}.
This is the constraint of the github project organization: the crypto_mb
library, that is going to be upstream-ed, now is hosted within the project for
another library IPP Crypto, which is not target for upstreaming. So, that's why
URL contains github home for the hosted project, and the doc refers to the
inner one.

Please take a look at it again and let me know if it now looks ok. The links to
updated spec/srpm are in the BZ description.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1896988] Review Request: fbzmq - Framework for writing services in C++ while leveraging libzmq

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896988



--- Comment #8 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fbzmq


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1896988] Review Request: fbzmq - Framework for writing services in C++ while leveraging libzmq

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896988



--- Comment #7 from Michel Alexandre Salim  ---
Thanks Neal!

$ fedpkg request-repo fbzmq 1896988   
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/30725


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1885430] Review Request: qatlib - Intel® QuickAssist Technology Library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1885430



--- Comment #23 from giovanni.cabi...@intel.com ---
> Why does qatlib need to rename the library file to include the software 
> version?
The main reason why this was done in the upstream project was to have a simple
way to understand which version of the library is installed in the system by
looking at /lib64/.
This is mainly an issue when the library is built and installed from sources
but is not when the RPM is installed since you can check what rpm is installed.
The libraries were renamed as:
libqat.so -> libqat.so.20.10.0
libqat.so.0 -> libqat.so.20.10.0
libqat.so.20.10.0

The makefile can be changed as you proposed to have
 libqat.so -> libqat.so.0.0.0
 libqat.so.0 -> libqat.so.0.0.0
 libqat.so.0.0.0
as this is the default produced by autotools.
In order to be able to detect the version we can add an additional symlink that
includes in the name the version of the library:
libqat-20.10.so -> libqat.so.0.0.0

If this option is preferred we need to go for an additional upstream release (I
have a patch already for that). It might take a couple of days to get it
approved due to the internal process.

BTW, I also checked other libraries and it seems that there isn't consistency.
For e.g. this is the approach used by libc:
 libc.so.6 -> libc-2.32.so
 libc-2.32.so
 libc.so

In any case, is the realname of the library a problem?
In the current schema the realname updates at every release and it is
independent from the fully qualified soname (which includes the soversion).
Applications will be using the fully qualified soname and not referring
directly to the realname.

Regarding the component, I see now that qatlib has been added to Bugzilla. I
can now create a ticket for tracking the ExcludeArch.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1897619] Review Request: rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram - Asciidoctor diagramming extension

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897619

Christopher Brown  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Comment|0   |updated



--- Comment #0 has been edited ---

Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/snecklifter/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/master/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/snecker/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01768143-rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram-2.0.5-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: Asciidoctor Diagram is a set of Asciidoctor extensions that
enables you to add diagrams, which you describe using plain text, to your
AsciiDoc document.

Fedora Account System Username: snecker

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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] Review Request: ghc-HaXml - Utilities for “true” manipulating XML documents

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880903



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-edae7b83a3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-edae7b83a3


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1897619] New: Review Request: rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram - Asciidoctor diagramming extension

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897619

Bug ID: 1897619
   Summary: Review Request: rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram -
Asciidoctor diagramming extension
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: chris.br...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL:
https://github.com/snecklifter/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/blob/master/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/snecker/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01768143-rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram-2.0.5-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: Asciidoctor Diagram is a set of Asciidoctor extensions that
enables you to add diagrams, which you describe using plain text, to your
AsciiDoc document.

Fedora Account System Username: snecker


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1880636] Review Request: jmc module rpms

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880636



--- Comment #29 from Miro Hrončok  ---
Thanks. I'll look at them ASAP.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1880636] Review Request: jmc module rpms

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880636



--- Comment #28 from Jie Kang  ---
I've updated the jmc srpm to use jakarta-mail now that it is 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 1880636] Review Request: jmc module rpms

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880636

Jie Kang  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Comment|0   |updated



--- Comment #0 has been edited ---

Spec URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/jmc/raw/ursine/f/jmc.spec
SRPM URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/jmc/raw/ursine/f/jmc-7.1.1-8.fc34.src.rpm

Spec URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/jmc-core/raw/ursine/f/jmc-core.spec
SRPM URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/jmc-core/raw/ursine/f/jmc-core-7.1.1-5.fc34.src.rpm

Spec URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/directory-maven-plugin/raw/ursine/f/directory-maven-plugin.spec
SRPM URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/directory-maven-plugin/raw/ursine/f/directory-maven-plugin-0.3.1-2.fc34.src.rpm

Spec URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/owasp-java-encoder/raw/ursine/f/owasp-java-encoder.spec
SRPM URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jkang/rpms/owasp-java-encoder/raw/ursine/f/owasp-java-encoder-1.2.2-4.fc34.src.rpm

Fedora Account System Username: jkang

This is to unretire the master branch for these previously module-only packages
for https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2406
jmc
jmc-core
directory-maven-plugin
owasp-java-encoder


Goal is to deliver jmc via ursine packages.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1157162] Review Request: badvpn - Peer-to-peer VPN solution

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157162

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-69e1016486 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-69e1016486


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1889431] Review Request: python-pytest-httpx - Send responses to httpx

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1889431



--- Comment #4 from Georg Sauthoff  ---
Fabian, can you push the reviewed .spec to the rawhide branch of your pagure
repository?

python-pytest-httpx is currently blocking a new python-zeep release.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://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 1892756] Review Request: python-managesieve - Accessing a Sieve-Server for managing Sieve scripts

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892756



--- Comment #6 from Germano Massullo  ---
I am investigating how to deal with Multiple Licensing Scenarios like this one:

Copyright and License
~~

:Copyright: (C) 2003-2018 by Hartmut Goebel 

:License for `managesieve`:
   `Python Software Foundation License
   `_

:License for 'sieveshell' and test suite: `GPL v3
   `_


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://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 1157162] Review Request: badvpn - Peer-to-peer VPN solution

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157162



--- Comment #9 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/badvpn


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1896590] Review Request: watchman - File alteration monitoring service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896590



--- Comment #13 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/watchman


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1896988] Review Request: fbzmq - Framework for writing services in C++ while leveraging libzmq

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896988

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #6 from Neal Gompa  ---
Everything looks fine to me.

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 1896988] Review Request: fbzmq - Framework for writing services in C++ while leveraging libzmq

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896988



--- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa  ---
Package Review
==

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



= 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", "Expat License", "Apache License 2.0",
 "GNU General Public License, Version 2". 156 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/ngompa/1896988-fbzmq/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.
[-]: 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 61440 bytes in 12 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]: Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
 present.
 Note: Package has .a files: fbzmq-static.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in fbzmq-
 static
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
 justified.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstrea

[Bug 1897460] Review Request: deepin-session-shell - Deepin desktop-environment - session-shell module

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897460

Qiyu Yan  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||yanqiy...@gmail.com



--- Comment #1 from Qiyu Yan  ---
- Why the usage of %{?fedora}, will this spec file be used to build for other
distros? While I think it is better to leave only fedora (or epel) suport here.
- Add dbus-common as dependency

Issues:
===
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
  file-validate if there is such a file.
  False alarm, /usr/share/xgreeters/lightdm-deepin-greeter.desktop isn't
application desktop file
- Dist tag is present.
  using %{?fedora:%dist}, but why?


= 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 successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or
 later", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later [generated file]",
 "[generated file]". 378 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/yan/review/1897460-deepin-session-
 shell/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/dbus-1/services,
 /usr/share/dbus-1
 Add dbus-common as dependency?
[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.
[-]: 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.
[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]: 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[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]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[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)

[Bug 1897277] Rename Review Request: deepin-qt5platform-plugins - Qt platform integration plugins for Deepin Desktop Environment

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897277

Qiyu Yan  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||yanqiy...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|yanqiy...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Qiyu Yan  ---
- consider exclude /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/platforms/libdxcb.so from auto
provides?

= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
 BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or
 later", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 3 GNU General
 Public License, Version 2", "NTP License (legal disclaimer)", "*No
 copyright* GNU General Public License v3.0 or later". 47 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 2 files licensed with MIT, whole program is GPL, no matter
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: 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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version

[Bug 1157162] Review Request: badvpn - Peer-to-peer VPN solution

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157162



--- Comment #8 from Pete Walter  ---
Nice, thanks, Robert-André! Requested the repo now. (I don't need a sponsor: I
got sponsored years ago.)


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

[Bug 1822536] Review Request: A2 - This is Workload Automation Software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822536

Elliott Sales de Andrade  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Last Closed|2020-04-09 11:22:47 |2020-11-13 09:36:43



--- Comment #6 from Elliott Sales de Andrade  ---
It is not acceptable to be 'free', it must be Free
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#SoftwareLicenses

I don't see any source for the software or the rpm. Free trials don't count
either.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1803479] Review Request: libredwg - GNU C library and programs to read and write DWG files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803479

Elliott Sales de Andrade  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Whiteboard||AwaitingSubmitter




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1883732] Review Request: rubygem-sassc-rails - Integrate SassC-Ruby into Rails

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1883732

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(vondruch@redhat.c |
   |om) |



--- Comment #8 from Vít Ondruch  ---
Sorry, this is still on my TODO list


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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 1727506] Review Request: python-spikeextractors - Python module for extracting recorded and spike sorted extracellular data from different file types and formats

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1727506



--- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)  ---
Luis and Luis (:P): if you're not working on this please close the ticket
(un-assign the NeuroFedora ticket too if there's one). That way someone else
can take it up.

Cheers,
Ankur


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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