[Bug 1976056] Review Request: rust-fallible_collections - fallible allocation api to std collections
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976056 Rémi Lauzier changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1976059 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976059 [Bug 1976059] Review Request: rust-mp4parse - Parser for ISO base media file format (mp4) -- 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 1702801] Review Request: black-hole-solver - Solver for the solitaire games Golf, Black Hole, and All in a Row
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1702801 Christensen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gv4uq...@chapedia.net --- Comment #8 from Christensen --- Many peoples like to playing golf but they don,t know how big is a golf ball. That's why today am here to tell you about it. If you are interested to know how big is a golf ball. then just click https://rangefindereviews.com/how-big-is-a-golf-ball/ and read the all details. -- 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 1976054] Review Request: rust-bitreader - BitReader helps reading individual bits from a slice of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976054 Rémi Lauzier changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1976059 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976059 [Bug 1976059] Review Request: rust-mp4parse - Parser for ISO base media file format (mp4) -- 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 1976059] Review Request: rust-mp4parse - Parser for ISO base media file format (mp4)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976059 Rémi Lauzier changed: What|Removed |Added CC||remilauz...@protonmail.com Depends On||1976056, 1976054 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976054 [Bug 1976054] Review Request: rust-bitreader - BitReader helps reading individual bits from a slice of bytes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976056 [Bug 1976056] Review Request: rust-fallible_collections - fallible allocation api to std collections -- 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 1976059] New: Review Request: rust-mp4parse - Parser for ISO base media file format (mp4)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976059 Bug ID: 1976059 Summary: Review Request: rust-mp4parse - Parser for ISO base media file format (mp4) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: remilauz...@protonmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303761-rust-mp4parse/rust-mp4parse.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303761-rust-mp4parse/rust-mp4parse-0.11.5-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Parser for ISO base media file format (mp4) Fedora Account System Username: remilauzier -- 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 1976056] New: Review Request: rust-fallible_collections - fallible allocation api to std collections
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976056 Bug ID: 1976056 Summary: Review Request: rust-fallible_collections - fallible allocation api to std collections Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: remilauz...@protonmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303757-rust-fallible_collections/rust-fallible_collections.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303757-rust-fallible_collections/rust-fallible_collections-0.4.2-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: a crate which adds fallible allocation api to std collections Fedora Account System Username: remilauzier -- 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 1976054] New: Review Request: rust-bitreader - BitReader helps reading individual bits from a slice of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976054 Bug ID: 1976054 Summary: Review Request: rust-bitreader - BitReader helps reading individual bits from a slice of bytes Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: remilauz...@protonmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303700-rust-bitreader/rust-bitreader.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303700-rust-bitreader/rust-bitreader-0.3.4-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: BitReader helps reading individual bits from a slice of bytes Fedora Account System Username: remilauzier -- 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 1969450] Review Request: cockpit-certificates - Cockpit user interface for certificates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1969450 --- Comment #6 from Martin Pitt --- Ack, thanks for the clarifications! We'll look at that and report back here in a few weeks. -- 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 1976049] New: Review Request: rust-ogg - Ogg container decoder and encoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976049 Bug ID: 1976049 Summary: Review Request: rust-ogg - Ogg container decoder and encoder Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: remilauz...@protonmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303674-rust-ogg/rust-ogg.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/zemeroth/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303674-rust-ogg/rust-ogg-0.8.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Ogg container decoder and encoder written in pure Rust Fedora Account System Username: remilauzier -- 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 1973110] Review Request: zonefs-tools - Provides user utilities for the zonefs file system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973110 --- Comment #7 from Damien Le Moal --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #6) > Issues: > === > - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided > in the spec URL. > Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in > /home/ngompa/1973110-zonefs-tools/diff.txt > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ > > > The sources in the SRPM don't match what I can download with spectool from > the spec file. Please fix this. Sorry about that. I forgot to push the updated srpm. Everything should be in sync now. Thanks ! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1973110] Review Request: zonefs-tools - Provides user utilities for the zonefs file system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973110 --- Comment #6 from Neal Gompa --- Issues: === - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/ngompa/1973110-zonefs-tools/diff.txt See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ The sources in the SRPM don't match what I can download with spectool from the spec file. Please fix this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1973110] Review Request: zonefs-tools - Provides user utilities for the zonefs file system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973110
--- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in
/home/ngompa/1973110-zonefs-tools/diff.txt
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License, Version
2", "[generated file]", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later",
"FSF Unlimited License (with Retention) [generated file]", "FSF
Unlimited License [generated file]", "GNU General Public License v2.0
or later [generated file]", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or
later", "Expat License [generated file]", "FSF Unlimited License (with
Retention) GNU General Public License, Version 2", "FSF Unlimited
License (with Retention)". 14 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/ngompa/1973110-zonefs-
tools/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: 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 is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files
[Bug 1976041] New: Review Request: golang-github-peterbourgon-ff-3 - Flags-first package for configuration
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976041 Bug ID: 1976041 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-peterbourgon-ff-3 - Flags-first package for configuration Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: l...@sub-pop.net QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/linkdupont/mqttcli/fedora-34-x86_64/02303666-golang-github-peterbourgon-ff-3/golang-github-peterbourgon-ff-3.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/linkdupont/mqttcli/fedora-34-x86_64/02303666-golang-github-peterbourgon-ff-3/golang-github-peterbourgon-ff-3-3.0.0-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Flags-first package for configuration Fedora Account System Username: linkdupont -- 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 1976038] New: Review Request: golang-github-sgreben-flagvar - A collection of CLI argument types for the Go `flag` package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976038 Bug ID: 1976038 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-sgreben-flagvar - A collection of CLI argument types for the Go `flag` package Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: l...@sub-pop.net QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/linkdupont/mqttcli/fedora-34-x86_64/02303652-golang-github-sgreben-flagvar/golang-github-sgreben-flagvar.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/linkdupont/mqttcli/fedora-34-x86_64/02303652-golang-github-sgreben-flagvar/golang-github-sgreben-flagvar-1.10.1-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: A collection of CLI argument types for the Go `flag` package Fedora Account System Username: linkdupont -- 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
[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been waiting more than 3 days for a response from you. Please take action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.) We'll remind you again tomorrow if these requests are still outstanding, or if there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 3 days for your response. If you want these mails to stop you need to go to the bug[s] and cancel or ack the needinfo flags. See: * https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=faq.html#flags point 3 * https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=faq.html#miscellaneous point 2 needinfo Bug 1958190: Review Request: clipnotify - Clipboard management (4 days old) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1958190 To see all your outstanding requests, visit: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=package-review%40lists.fedoraproject.org&group=type ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-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 1974114] Review Request: python-environs - Python library for parsing environment variables
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974114 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-c3669c1600 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-c3669c1600 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-c3669c1600 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1976012] New: Review Request: wireplumber - A modular session/policy manager for PipeWire
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976012 Bug ID: 1976012 Summary: Review Request: wireplumber - A modular session/policy manager for PipeWire Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: peter.hutte...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://people.freedesktop.org/~whot/rpms/wireplumber.spec SRPM URL: https://people.freedesktop.org/~whot/rpms/wireplumber-0.4.0-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: WirePlumber is a modular session/policy manager for PipeWire and a GObject-based high-level library that wraps PipeWire's API, providing convenience for writing the daemon's modules as well as external tools for managing PipeWire. Fedora Account System Username: whot Note that due to upstream incompatibilities, lua 5.3 is currently bundled, I understand this will need an exception, meanwhile I've added the appropriate Provides: bundled(lua) = 5.3.6 line. -- 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 1973110] Review Request: zonefs-tools - Provides user utilities for the zonefs file system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973110 --- Comment #4 from Damien Le Moal --- Hi Neal, Ping ? Anything else that you see needing fixes ? -- 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 1975981] Review Request: rust-svgfilters - Implementation of various SVG filters
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975981 --- Comment #1 from Rémi Lauzier --- https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/rust-simp/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303466-rust-svgfilters/rust-svgfilters.spec https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/rust-simp/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303466-rust-svgfilters/rust-svgfilters-0.3.0-1.fc35.src.rpm update -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1975981] New: Review Request: rust-svgfilters - Implementation of various SVG filters
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975981 Bug ID: 1975981 Summary: Review Request: rust-svgfilters - Implementation of various SVG filters Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: remilauz...@protonmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/rust-simp/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303459-rust-svgfilters/rust-svgfilters.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/remilauzier/rust-simp/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02303459-rust-svgfilters/rust-svgfilters-0.3.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Implementation of various SVG filters Fedora Account System Username: remilauzier -- 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 1957928] Review Request: rpminspect-data-centos - Build deviation compliance tool data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1957928 --- Comment #14 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpminspect-data-centos -- 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 1973682] Review Request: jsonnet - A data templating language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973682 --- Comment #21 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/jsonnet -- 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 1975859] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 --- Comment #6 from Ben Beasley --- > But, is it really necessary if the original review request cannot be accepted > because it does not package the latest version? Also, is a situation like > this (duplicate review request) documented anywhere? I think it’s not-quite-explicitly covered by the policy: > The idea is to move the ticket to a state where other interested parties can > submit the package or take over the review. If the stalled package process completes and their bug is closed: > If the bug is resubmitted by someone else, it is also reasonable to change > the resolution on the closed bug to DUPLICATE and mark it as a duplicate of > the new bug so that reviewers of the new ticket can easily find the work that > was done on the old one. If the original submitter responded within the allowed time and updated their submission to the latest version, they could proceed, and your bug would be the duplicate. I’ve been in your position recently; in that case, the other submitter did come back and encourage me to proceed with my version instead. -- 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 1910392] Review Request: python-build - Simple, correct PEP517 package builder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1910392 Lumír Balhar changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lbal...@redhat.com --- Comment #11 from Lumír Balhar --- Hello, Fabian. I'd like to package this tool to Fedora. If you are no longer interested in this review, could you please close it? I'll then open a new one. You can see my progress in: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lbalhar/build/builds/ -- 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 1912120] Review Request: imhex - Hex editor for reverse engineering
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912120 Ben Beasley changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(fed...@svgames.pl ||) --- Comment #6 from Ben Beasley --- Just checking if you are still working on this or not… -- 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 1914450] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450 Lumír Balhar changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(filbranden@gmail. ||com) --- Comment #12 from Lumír Balhar --- Filipe, it'd nice of you if you can close the bug if you are no longer interested in it. It'd actually speed things up because we wouldn't need to wait until the end of the dedicated time defined in the policy. -- 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 1969450] Review Request: cockpit-certificates - Cockpit user interface for certificates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1969450 Ben Beasley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@musicinmybrain.net --- Comment #5 from Ben Beasley --- > As Katerina already mentioned, we don't do that in any other cockpit package > which is in Fedora, so doing that will take quite some time. But honestly it > doesn't buy anyone anything, other than just a whole lot of busywork, and > adding 350 MB of node_modules/ to an otherwise 1 MB tarball. Rebuilding the > webpack from a static node_modules/ copy is completely reproducible, so > taking the already built one is a *lot* more efficient, plus avoids > transitive licensing/source code problems with "we have to redistribute 735 > npmjs.com modules now" (as they are *also* prebuilt and not in preferred form > of modification). > > A developer who wants to change something can just do that and run `make`, > which will download everything according to package-lock.json. The original > tarball *does* ship the source, it just ships the pre-built webpack in > addition. > > I know that this situation sucks for distributions, that's just how the JS > world looks like these days :-( Agreed that everything about this sucks—but https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/JavaScript/#_compilationminification is extremely clear: > Shipping pre-minified or pre-compiled code is unacceptable in Fedora. There’s a corresponding rule for compiled CSS, too: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Web_Assets/#_css If this means it is impractical or impossible to package some software that is considered essential, then FESCo may need to revisit the rules, or approve an exception. > [If you mean the node_modules dependencies: No, we can't. `npm > install`/npmjs.com packages/releases are also pre-built, and thus minified. > Building *everything* from source would mean to track down several hundred > projects from their upstreams, and building them first (and there is no > automation that applies to all of them). This is completely impractical, but > also I don't believe you actually meant that, as nothing in a distro gets > built like that.] For better or worse, every NodeJS-based package that complies with the current guidelines is built very much as Robert suggests, with the help of a standardized bundler script (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Node.js/). Consider https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fx, which has 13 NPM packages in its installed “production” bundle but has over 400 more in the “dev” bundle so it can run its tests. You’re right that in some cases the NPM dependencies could contain pre-minified web assets. This is hard to audit for, and probably often flies under the radar, but in principle I think this would also be a problem under current guidelines. Note that the NodeJS guidelines do encourage using NPM tarballs in general (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Node.js/#_using_tarballs_from_the_npm_registry). My understanding (from a combination of https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-packaged/#_pregenerated_code plus the more-specific rules for JS and CSS) is that you do have to include all of your own sources for the generated web assets in the “binary” RPM, but you do not have to install a copy of the build pipeline. -- 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 1975859] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 --- Comment #5 from Lumír Balhar --- (In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #2) > Note to all that a review may be done here, but approval should be delayed > until the stalled review process is completed for the previous ticket > (RHBZ#1914450). See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450#c8. I can wait, that's not a problem. But, is it really necessary if the original review request cannot be accepted because it does not package the latest version? Also, is a situation like this (duplicate review request) documented anywhere? (In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #3) > > # some of them needs `build` package we don't have in Fedora yet, > > Note that there is an existing potentially-stalled review request for that, > too: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1910392 Thanks, I plan to package it as well. So I'm gonna take a look and try to contact the requestor. (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #4) > I appreciate the upstream reports! Spec file looks sane, license checks out. > Tests pass, provides and requires are sane. Package installs and functions > as described. Thanks! I've also tried to fix some of them but the code itself is far from perfect. -- 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 1973682] Review Request: jsonnet - A data templating language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973682
Ben Beasley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #20 from Ben Beasley ---
Package approved! Don’t let me forget to write you a pair of man pages.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= Issues =
- The python3-jsonnet subpackage does not have to install the LICENSE file
separately since it depends on the -libs subpackage. (However, it is
permitted to do so.)
= 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.
There is a Python extension module, correctly installed.
[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", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0",
"Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* Creative Commons Attribution 2.5
Generic License", "NTP License". 483 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/reviewer/1973682-jsonnet/licensecheck.txt
Note that the RSA license is incorrectly detected as “NTP License”
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
Multiple bundled libraries, correctly removed in %prep, except md5
copylib which is correctly handled.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
pr
[Bug 1974114] Review Request: python-environs - Python library for parsing environment variables
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974114 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-c3669c1600 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-c3669c1600 -- 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 1971220] Review Request: rust-plotters-svg - Plotters SVG backend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971220 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-20af799ec4 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-20af799ec4 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-20af799ec4 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971512] Review Request: jigawatts - Java CRIU helper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971512 Severin Gehwolf changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|sgehw...@redhat.com |jerb...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971512] Review Request: jigawatts - Java CRIU helper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971512 --- Comment #2 from Severin Gehwolf --- Please set flag 'fedora-review' => ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971512] Review Request: jigawatts - Java CRIU helper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971512 Severin Gehwolf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||sgehw...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sgehw...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971220] Review Request: rust-plotters-svg - Plotters SVG backend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971220 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-15328146ba has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-15328146ba \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-15328146ba 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1975908] Review Request: rust-getset - We're ready to go!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975908 --- Comment #1 from Davide Cavalca --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=70748998 -- 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 1975908] New: Review Request: rust-getset - We're ready to go!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975908 Bug ID: 1975908 Summary: Review Request: rust-getset - We're ready to go! Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-getset/rust-getset.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-getset/rust-getset-0.1.1-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: We're ready to go! A procedural macro for generating the most basic getters and setters on fields. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 1965302] Review Request : rust-navi - An interactive cheatsheet tool for the command-line.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1965302 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-730e3fa100 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-730e3fa100` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-730e3fa100 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1966388] Review Request: rust-libdeflater - Bindings to DEFLATE (de)compression
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1966388 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-121bae4c14 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-121bae4c14` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-121bae4c14 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971222] Review Request: rust-plotters-bitmap - Plotters Bitmap Backend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971222 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-563df684f3 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-563df684f3 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-563df684f3 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1965241] Review Request: rust-drg - Command line tool to interact with a drogue-cloud instance
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1965241 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-06-24 16:52:49 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-d858d5ec0a has been pushed to the Fedora 34 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971394] Review Request: x11docker - Run GUI applications and desktops in Linux containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971394 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-06-24 16:52:08 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-286782014e has been pushed to the Fedora 34 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971386] Review Request: tini - A tiny but valid init for containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971386 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-9f2524be9e has been pushed to the Fedora 34 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1975901] Review Request: rust-enum-iterator - Tools to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975901 Davide Cavalca changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1975900 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975900 [Bug 1975900] Review Request: rust-enum-iterator-derive - Procedural macro to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum -- 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 1975900] Review Request: rust-enum-iterator-derive - Procedural macro to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975900 Davide Cavalca changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1975901 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975901 [Bug 1975901] Review Request: rust-enum-iterator - Tools to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum -- 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 1975901] New: Review Request: rust-enum-iterator - Tools to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975901 Bug ID: 1975901 Summary: Review Request: rust-enum-iterator - Tools to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-enum-iterator/rust-enum-iterator.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-enum-iterator/rust-enum-iterator-0.6.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Tools to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 1975900] New: Review Request: rust-enum-iterator-derive - Procedural macro to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975900 Bug ID: 1975900 Summary: Review Request: rust-enum-iterator-derive - Procedural macro to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-enum-iterator-derive/rust-enum-iterator-derive.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-enum-iterator-derive/rust-enum-iterator-derive-0.6.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Procedural macro to iterate over the variants of a field-less enum. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 1971386] Review Request: tini - A tiny but valid init for containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971386 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-06-24 16:45:53 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-d96b00b4ea 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1971394] Review Request: x11docker - Run GUI applications and desktops in Linux containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971394 Bug 1971394 depends on bug 1971386, which changed state. Bug 1971386 Summary: Review Request: tini - A tiny but valid init for containers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971386 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1957928] Review Request: rpminspect-data-centos - Build deviation compliance tool data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1957928 Brian Lane changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(b...@redhat.com) | --- Comment #13 from Brian Lane --- Looks good to me! -- 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 1975859] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 --- Comment #4 from Miro Hrončok --- I appreciate the upstream reports! Spec file looks sane, license checks out. Tests pass, provides and requires are sane. Package installs and functions as described. -- 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 1975859] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 --- Comment #3 from Ben Beasley --- > # some of them needs `build` package we don't have in Fedora yet, Note that there is an existing potentially-stalled review request for that, too: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1910392 -- 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 1975859] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 Ben Beasley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@musicinmybrain.net --- Comment #2 from Ben Beasley --- Note to all that a review may be done here, but approval should be delayed until the stalled review process is completed for the previous ticket (RHBZ#1914450). See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450#c8. -- 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 1975874] Review Request: rust-rustbus_derive - Derive proc-macros for the rustbus crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975874 --- Comment #1 from Davide Cavalca --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=70745893 -- 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 1975874] New: Review Request: rust-rustbus_derive - Derive proc-macros for the rustbus crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975874 Bug ID: 1975874 Summary: Review Request: rust-rustbus_derive - Derive proc-macros for the rustbus crate Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-rustbus_derive/rust-rustbus_derive.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-rustbus_derive/rust-rustbus_derive-0.2.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Derive proc-macros for the rustbus crate. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 1957928] Review Request: rpminspect-data-centos - Build deviation compliance tool data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1957928 David Cantrell changed: What|Removed |Added CC||b...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(b...@redhat.com) --- Comment #12 from David Cantrell --- To close the loop on this... (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #11) > (In reply to David Cantrell from comment #10) > > (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #9) > > > (In reply to David Cantrell from comment #8) > > > > (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #5) > > > > > It was already asked before and rejected: > > > > > https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/942 > > > > > > > > Yeah, I've read that. But there's still nothing in the packaging > > > > guidelines > > > > for Fedora that explicitly say "don't do this." > > > > > > > > I think you should understand the workflow that I'm using. I fail to > > > > see > > > > how %include is a problem here because the SRPM is built from the > > > > dist-git > > > > branch now and the spec file is processed accordingly. The resulting > > > > RPMs > > > > contain the changelog entries in the RPM headers, so all of the data is > > > > there. The resulting SRPM also includes the 'changelog' file which gets > > > > installed if you ever install the source RPM locally and rebuild the > > > > package. I see all of the comments in the PR you linked, but I have > > > > yet to > > > > see any actual problem from the workflow I have. Maybe I'm missing > > > > something. > > > > > > > > > > This really sounds like you should just have an upstream changelog file > > > that > > > gets pulled in as a doc. The point of the %changelog in the package is to > > > detail the packaging changes. I know people do mix the two, but the > > > fundamental assumption for RPM changelogs that most people have is that > > > they > > > detail the changes done to the package, and the changes to the software is > > > inside the package as a file. > > > > OK, so I've heard arguments in both directions here. The %changelog should > > include packaging changes, but it should also include summaries of changes > > of significance. I can see arguments for both. In the case of these > > rpminspect packages, nothing of consequence is going to really happen > > packaging wise. They are all very simple. Are you saying the %changelog > > can just simply be "- Upgrade to rpminspect-data-centos-1.0" and leave it at > > that? I can add a %doc which is a generated ChangeLog from the git log. > > > > A comparison can be made with anaconda where we have always maintained the > > RPM %changelog detailing all of the changes for each release. I felt that > > same idea applied here. At least in the case of the rpminspect data > > packages, maybe not necessarily the program. > > > > What would you prefer I do for the %changelog here? Maybe I am > > overcomplicating things because I felt people wanted to see the detailed > > changes via "rpm -q --changelog PACKAGE". > > > > I think that as long as nobody is specifically asking for it, I wouldn't do > it that way. As far as I know, the reason Anaconda does that is that it's > part of the tito-based workflow they adopted. If you *want* to, then by all > means, but the general guidance I've gotten over the years is that having > the software changelog in the docdir is more than sufficient for those kinds > of changes. That's not the reason anaconda uses the RPM %changelog that way. They may not do this anymore. I started working on anaconda in 2005 and the unique thing about the releases is that there was no upstream tarball release of anaconda. A release was made in SRPM format and built in Fedora directly. We used the %changelog block as our project's changelog. This is different than many other projects, but it's what was going on when I joined the project. Having worked on anaconda for so long, I began to like the summarized %changelog entries that reflected changes that actually went in to the code as opposed to spec file changes or other such stuff like that. I have not looked so I don't know if the anaconda team still does that, but at least that's the reason we were doing that for so long. > > > The problem I generally have with your method of changelogs is the usage > > > of > > > %include, which just makes it messy, but it's included as a source, so... > > > > > > *sigh* > > > > I get that and I don't want to make things confusing for people. My issue > > is I'm trying to understand the technical failures by using %include. Style > > opinions vary across all developers, so I get that. You and I can just > > disagree on style, which is fine. The failure I have been able to reproduce > > using %include is if you are rebuilding locally where _topdir gets redefined > > in your environment and rpmbuild then cannot fi
[Bug 1975859] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 Lumír Balhar changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1956754 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1956754 [Bug 1956754] python-notebook-6.4.0 final 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 1973934] Review Request: python-connection_pool - Thread-safe connection pool for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973934 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-a159ca4c98 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-a159ca4c98 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a159ca4c98 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1974787] Review Request: python-apt - Python bindings for APT
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974787
Carl George 🤠 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Carl George 🤠 ---
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]: 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, Version
2", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later [obsolete FSF postal
address (Temple Place)]", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later",
"FSF All Permissive License GNU General Public License v2.0 or later",
"FSF All Permissive License". 272 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/carl/packaging/reviews/python-
apt/1974787-python-apt/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Pa
[Bug 1914450] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450 --- Comment #11 from Lumír Balhar --- (In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #10) > I’ll be happy to review your package when it’s ready. That sounds awesome, thank you. There is the new review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 I'm gonna keep this one open so there is some competion and there is still some chance that this one will be finished sooner than mine. -- 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 1975864] Review Request: rust-proc-mounts - Fetch active mounts and swaps on a Linux system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975864 Davide Cavalca changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1975856 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975856 [Bug 1975856] Review Request: rust-partition-identity - Find the ID of a device by its path, or find a device path by its ID -- 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 1975856] Review Request: rust-partition-identity - Find the ID of a device by its path, or find a device path by its ID
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975856 Davide Cavalca changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1975864 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975864 [Bug 1975864] Review Request: rust-proc-mounts - Fetch active mounts and swaps on a Linux system -- 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 1975864] New: Review Request: rust-proc-mounts - Fetch active mounts and swaps on a Linux system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975864 Bug ID: 1975864 Summary: Review Request: rust-proc-mounts - Fetch active mounts and swaps on a Linux system Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-proc-mounts/rust-proc-mounts.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-proc-mounts/rust-proc-mounts-0.2.4-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Fetch active mounts and swaps on a Linux system. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 1975859] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 --- Comment #1 from Lumír Balhar --- This package is a new dependency of the latest version of python-notebook. I've verified in the same copr repository that python-notebook builds fine with this new package. See: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lbalhar/notebook/builds/ As you can see, there are a lot of packaging issues workarounded in the current version but all of them are reported upstream and I'll find some cycles to help them fix them. -- 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 1975859] New: Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975859 Bug ID: 1975859 Summary: Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: lbal...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lbalhar/notebook/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02302154-python-jupyter-packaging/python-jupyter-packaging.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lbalhar/notebook/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02302154-python-jupyter-packaging/python-jupyter-packaging-0.10.2-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: This package contains utilities for making Python packages with and without accompanying JavaScript packages. Fedora Account System Username: lbalhar -- 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 1975856] Review Request: rust-partition-identity - Find the ID of a device by its path, or find a device path by its ID
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975856 --- Comment #1 from Davide Cavalca --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=70744965 -- 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 1975856] New: Review Request: rust-partition-identity - Find the ID of a device by its path, or find a device path by its ID
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975856 Bug ID: 1975856 Summary: Review Request: rust-partition-identity - Find the ID of a device by its path, or find a device path by its ID Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-partition-identity/rust-partition-identity.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/rust-partition-identity/rust-partition-identity-0.2.8-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Find the ID of a device by its path, or find a device path by its ID. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 1975845] Review Request: libadwaita - Building blocks for modern GNOME applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975845 Artem changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gnome-sig@lists.fedoraproje ||ct.org Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #2 from Artem --- Some new versions of packages in Fedora already requires 'libadwaita'. Due lack of time HELPWANTED with packaging 'gi-docgen' additionally and build libadwaita with tests enabled. Fedora Review: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/atim/for-review/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02302231-libadwaita/fedora-review/review.txt -- 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 1914450] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450 --- Comment #10 from Ben Beasley --- I’ll be happy to review your package when it’s ready. - If you’re starting with my sample spec file, note that > BuildRequires: python3dist(setuptools) is not needed when %pyproject_buildrequires is used. (I didn’t know that at the time.) -- 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 1975845] Review Request: libadwaita - Building blocks for modern GNOME applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975845 --- Comment #1 from Artem --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=70744132 -- 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 1975845] New: Review Request: libadwaita - Building blocks for modern GNOME applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975845 Bug ID: 1975845 Summary: Review Request: libadwaita - Building blocks for modern GNOME applications Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ego.corda...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/libadwaita.spec SRPM URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/libadwaita-1.0.0-0.1.alpha.1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Building blocks for modern GNOME applications. Fedora Account System Username: atim -- 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 1973680] Review Request: python-stopit - Raise asynchronous exceptions in other threads and more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973680 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-1cbbbd0997 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-1cbbbd0997 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1cbbbd0997 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1914450] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450 --- Comment #9 from Lumír Balhar --- Thanks for the info about the policy, I always forget about it. Nonetheless, there is a new version release with a lot of packaging and testing issues so even I'm basing my work on your specfile, a lot has to be done to make it ready. After that, I'll be glad to make the original author and you co-maintainers of the package. -- 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 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 --- Comment #8 from Remi Collet --- Thanks for the review (I miss the flag) Waiting for Change proposal to be approved before opening the SCM requests -- 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 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 --- Comment #7 from Remi Collet --- > So this line should be dropped. Damned... missed these during cleanup for Fedora review... (original spec file own them as I used a different _prefix) Fixed in https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/libmemcached-last.git/commit/?h=fedora&id=3f50fe823c15986e6d2cba009127d4d9954acb2b Spec and SRPM re-uploaded. > Apart from the outdated reference to MIT, this supports the conclusion that > spec files > are under CC-BY-SA-4.0 currently. from FPCA ==> (either MIT for software or CC BY-SA for content). btw, some consider spec as code, other (like me) as content / documentation. > OK. I think the license header is superfluous, but it's certainly allowed, > and if you want to keep it, > that fine. Yes, I want, as I said it is not superfluous when spec used outside Fedora. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
(In reply to Remi Collet from comment #4)
> No, default in Fedora is MIT
I read
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedoras-default-license-for-content-is-now-cc-by-sa-4-0/
and I assumed that this also applies to spec files.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#License_of_Fedora_SPEC_Files says
> All original Fedora contributions are governed by the Fedora Project
> Contributor Agreement (FPCA).
> This means that unless a spec file contains an explicit license attribution
> within it, it is available
> under the terms of the MIT license.
Apart from the outdated reference to MIT, this supports the conclusion that
spec files
are under CC-BY-SA-4.0 currently.
> And I think "implicit" licensing is a terrible error
> Too much bad experience with people pulling my work
> without any attribution.
OK. I think the license header is superfluous, but it's certainly allowed, and
if you want to keep it,
that fine.
Issues:
> %dir %{_includedir}
fedora-review says:
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include(filesystem)
So this line should be dropped.
> /usr/share/aclocal(filesystem),
> /usr/share/man/man3(filesystem)
Likewise.
+ package name is OK
+ license is acceptable for Fedora (BSD)
+ license is specified correctly
+ build and installs fine in mock
+ obsoletion of the older package is done correctly
+ BR/Provides/Requires look OK
+ %check is present and passes
rpmlint:
libmemcached-awesome.src:43: W: unversioned-explicit-provides
bundled(bobjenkins-hash)
OK.
libmemcached-awesome.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) memcached ->
schemed
libmemcached-awesome.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US memcached
-> schemed
libmemcached-awesome.x86_64: W: no-documentation
Bogus.
libmemcached-awesome-devel.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C for
libmemcached-awesome. If you like to develop programs using
libmemcached-awesome,
Consider wrapping the text.
libmemcached-awesome-devel.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package
/usr/include
libmemcached-awesome-devel.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package
/usr/share/man/man3
See above.
libmemcached-awesome-tools.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C
libmemcached-awesome tools
OK.
libmemcached-awesome-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark
OK.
libmemcached-awesome-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
capibilities -> capabilities, possibilities, liabilities
Please fix.
libmemcached-awesome-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
existance -> existence, assistance, resistance
Please fix.
libmemcached-awesome-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
memcached -> schemed
OK.
7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 9 warnings.
Package is approved. Please fix the minor issues listed above when importing.
--
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 1974787] Review Request: python-apt - Python bindings for APT
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974787
--- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Carl George 🤠 from comment #1)
> The python_provide macros should be removed, as it's deprecated. The
> provides for python-apt happens automatically in Fedora, and isn't
> applicable to EPEL8.
>
> -%{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-apt}
>
I'll remove it on import.
> There are tests upstream, please add a %check section and run the tests.
>
The tests do not run without a valid sources.list file and access to the
internet, so I didn't bother with them.
> There is a shebang in /usr/lib64/python3.10/site-packages/apt/auth.py that
> is causing a non-executable-script rpmlint error.
>
> There are lots of rpmlint incorrect-fsf-address errors, please work with the
> upstream to fix those (not a blocker).
I'll try to get that fixed upstream.
--
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 1914450] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450 --- Comment #8 from Ben Beasley --- Depends on whether you consider the one month to have started back in January, or on 2021-05-31 when I asked a direct question and set NEEDINFO. It will be one month since the latter next week—that would be an unambiguously safe time to post the comment starting the one-week period before closure under the stalled review policy. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews?rd=Extras/Policy/StalledReviews#Submitter_not_responding -- 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 1914450] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450 Lumír Balhar changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lbal...@redhat.com --- Comment #7 from Lumír Balhar --- I see that there is no activity for more than a month so I'm gonna open a new bug for this package because I need it to update python-notebook. -- 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 1914450] Review Request: python-jupyter-packaging - Tools to help build and install Jupyter Python packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914450 Lumír Balhar changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1956754 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1956754 [Bug 1956754] python-notebook-6.4.0 final 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 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 --- Comment #5 from Remi Collet --- > No https? 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 --- Comment #4 from Remi Collet --- > Is this really necessary? This is the same as the current default in Fedora, No, default in Fedora is MIT And I think "implicit" licensing is a terrible error Too much bad experience with people pulling my work without any attribution. -- 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 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zbys...@in.waw.pl Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek --- # License: CC-BY-SA # http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ Is this really necessary? This is the same as the current default in Fedora, and spec files normally don't have a header. If we update the licensing, this will become out of date… # Please, preserve the changelog entries Who would delete them? > http://memcached.org/ No https? -- 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 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 --- Comment #2 from Remi Collet --- Fedora Rawhide Scratch build https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=70730744 -- 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 1975704] Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet --- Change proposal: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/libmemcached-awesome -- 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 1975704] New: Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1975704 Bug ID: 1975704 Summary: Review Request: libmemcached-awesome - Client library and command line tools for memcached server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fed...@famillecollet.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/temp/libmemcached-awesome.spec SRPM URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/temp/libmemcached-awesome-1.1.0-1.fedora.src.rpm Description: libmemcached-awesome is a C/C++ client library and tools for the memcached server (http://memcached.org/). It has been designed to be light on memory usage, and provide full access to server side methods. This is a resurrection of the original work from Brian Aker at libmemcached.org. Fedora Account System Username: remi -- 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
