[Bug 1910057] Review Request: php-nikic-fast-route - Fast implementation of a regular expression based router
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1910057 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1932174 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932174 [Bug 1932174] phpMyAdmin-5.1.0 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929992] Review Request: python-wcmatch - Wildcard/glob file name matcher
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929992 --- Comment #1 from Parag Nemade --- Spec URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SPECS/python-wcmatch.spec SRPM URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SRPMS/python-wcmatch-8.1.1-3.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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929991] Review Request: python-backrefs - A wrapper around re and regex that adds additional back references
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929991 --- Comment #6 from Parag Nemade --- Sorry about 404 error. I realized I have wrong path set for package upload using fedora-create-review. Fixed this package for above comment suggestions. Below URL's will work fine. Spec URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SPECS/python-backrefs.spec SRPM URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SRPMS/python-backrefs-5.0.1-3.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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1795461] Review Request: practrand - Software package for the Randon number generation & testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795461 --- Comment #12 from Jiri Hladky --- Hi Ankur, I'm really sorry it took so long. Finally, everything is ready for the final review. I have fixed all the issues discussed above. Spec URL: https://jhladky.fedorapeople.org/practrand.spec SRPM URL: https://jhladky.fedorapeople.org/practrand-0.951-1.fc32.src.rpm There is the link to the successful Koji scratch build: koji build --scratch rawhide practrand-0.951-1.fc32.src.rpm https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=62609232 Could you please help me to finish the review? Thanks a lot! Jirka -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1931183] Review Request: python-spikeextractors - Python module for extracting recorded and spike sorted extracellular data from different file types and formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931183 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Thanks very much Andy! I'll have a look at this in the next day or two. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929991] Review Request: python-backrefs - A wrapper around re and regex that adds additional back references
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929991
--- Comment #5 from Miro Hrončok ---
Spec sanity:
> Source0:
> https://github.com/facelessuser/backrefs/archive/%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
This can be simplified to:
Source0:
https://github.com/facelessuser/backrefs/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
Or even:
Source0:%{url}/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> Requires: python3dist(regex)
Why is this needed? I see there is an extra called "extras" that requires
regex:
$ pip install 'backrefs[extras]'
Requirement already satisfied: backrefs[extras] in
./__venv_tmp__/lib/python3.9/site-packages (5.0.1)
Collecting regex; extra == "extras"
Using cached regex-2020.11.13-cp39-cp39-manylinux2014_x86_64.whl (732 kB)
Installing collected packages: regex
Successfully installed regex-2020.11.13
I suggest following this:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_python_extras
i.e. adding:
%{?python_extras_subpkg:%python_extras_subpkg -n python3-%{pypi_name} -i
%{python3_sitelib}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}-py%{python3_version}.egg-info
extras}
Then, the dependent packages can require python3.Xdist(backrefs[extras]) if
needed.
Instead now, the package always requires regex and there is no provide for
python3.Xdist(backrefs[extras]).
> # Remove bundled egg-info
> rm -rf %{pypi_name}.egg-info
This is not needed, there is no egg-info in the github tarball.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929991] Review Request: python-backrefs - A wrapper around re and regex that adds additional back references
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929991 --- Comment #4 from Miro Hrončok --- Spec URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SPECS/python-backrefs.spec SRPM URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SRPMS/python-backrefs-5.0.1-2.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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929991] Review Request: python-backrefs - A wrapper around re and regex that adds additional back references
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929991 Miro Hrončok changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mhron...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Miro Hrončok --- Error 404. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929789] Review Request: gr-funcube - GNURadio support for FUNcube Dongle Pro and FUNcube Dongle Pro+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929789
--- Comment #4 from Jan Žerdík ---
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]: 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]: 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.
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", "[generated file]". 58 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/jzerdik/TMP/1929789-gr-funcube/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/lib/udev/rules.d,
/usr/lib/udev
[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.
[x]: 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.
[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 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package 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
[Bug 1927011] Review Request: rust-sev - Library for AMD SEV
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927011 Cole Robinson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||crobi...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|crobi...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Cole Robinson --- Looks good to me, setting fedora-review+. Only things I noticed worth commenting on: Generic: [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format. The changelog timestamp is new to me, and it's not listed as an acceptable form in the packaging guidelines, so please fix that before pushing. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#changelogs Rpmlint --- rust-sev-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/cargo/registry/sev-0.1.0/.cargo-checksum.json Seems common in other rust packages so I think it's fine -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1839052] Review Request: plasma-wayland-protocols - Plasma Specific Protocols for Wayland
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839052 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED CC||rdie...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-02-23 15:26:22 --- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter --- closing, imported long 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1881169] Review Request: lz4-java - LZ4 compression for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881169 Alex Macdonald changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-02-23 15:21:34 --- Comment #23 from Alex Macdonald --- Thanks for the help everyone, a bit late on closing this one but I've been able to work on the repo now and have a build in koji for f34. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1881167] Review Request: mvel - MVFLEX Expression Language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881167 Alex Macdonald changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-02-23 15:21:20 --- Comment #18 from Alex Macdonald --- Thanks for the help everyone, a bit late on closing this one but I've been able to work on the repo now and have a build in koji for f34. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929789] Review Request: gr-funcube - GNURadio support for FUNcube Dongle Pro and FUNcube Dongle Pro+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929789
Jan Žerdík changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Jan Žerdík ---
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]: 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]: 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.
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", "[generated file]". 58 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/jzerdik/TMP/1929789-gr-funcube/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/lib/udev/rules.d,
/usr/lib/udev
[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.
[x]: 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.
[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 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package 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
[Bug 1881168] Review Request: cpptasks - Compile tasks for Apache Ant
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881168 Alex Macdonald changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed||2021-02-23 15:18:41 --- Comment #6 from Alex Macdonald --- cpptasks has been dropped as a dependency in the lz4-java package, and is no longer required. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1828205] Review Request: doctest - fast header-only C++ unit testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1828205 David Cantrell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-02-23 14:49:46 --- Comment #25 from David Cantrell --- This package is including in Fedora now, forgot to close out the bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1898123] Review Request: php-doctrine-dbal3 - Doctrine Database Abstraction Layer (DBAL) version 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898123 --- Comment #4 from Remi Collet --- Thanks for the review SCM requests https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/32280 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/32281 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929992] Review Request: python-wcmatch - Wildcard/glob file name matcher
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929992 Bug 1929992 depends on bug 1929990, which changed state. Bug 1929990 Summary: Review Request: python-bracex - Bash style brace expander https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929990 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1929990] Review Request: python-bracex - Bash style brace expander
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929990 Parag Nemade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-bracex-2.1.1-2.fc35 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2021-02-23 08:34:26 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
