[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc19 |ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc20 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-01-27 08:07:30 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-byteable-0.1.1-2.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard|Ready | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|POST Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jens Petersen --- Thanks for the review :) New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-byteable Short Description: Type class for sequence of bytes Owners: petersen Branches: f20 f19 el6 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Shakthi Kannan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Shakthi Kannan --- = MUST items = C/C++: [-]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [-]: Package contains no static executables. [-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: 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. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: 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 92160 bytes in 18 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 %doc. [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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local = SHOULD items = Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags sho
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Shakthi Kannan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||shakthim...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|shakthim...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | CC||haskell-devel@lists.fedorap ||roject.org Alias||ghc-byteable -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=yEKIDtIeVy&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1011873] Review Request: ghc-byteable - Type class for sequence of bytes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1011873 --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5981393 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kqhYDgDC39&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review