[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Adam Williamson (Red Hat) awill...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED CC||awill...@redhat.com Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2015-02-21 15:38:57 -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #22 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- Git done (by process-git-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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #21 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper Short Description: Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function Upstream URL: https://github.com/bantuXorg/php-ini-get-wrapper Owners: adamwill Branches: f20 f21 el6 epel7 InitialCC: -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #15 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com --- Since upstream made that release tarball, you can use it without issue. The intent of the Github section here (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL) is to refer to manually generated tarballs. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #16 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- tom: would it be possible to clarify the guidelines a bit? I've seen this question come up before, and I read the guidelines the same way as Remi at first. I can try and work up a draft if it would be of interest. thanks for the info. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #17 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com --- No, please, don't fix our guidelines, I couldn't bear it! /sarcasm -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #18 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- Well, pants, now I find the references for this stuff: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/252 https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/233 https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/233#comment:9 which suggest the intent really *is* 'don't ever use github-generated tarballs from tags', the justification being that Yes, the problem is that what commit a version points to can change while a commitid can't change. So if you want to download the same tarball you can't use a version. Since the guideline was drafted github invented the 'Releases' workflow, which is really just a bit of extra metadata on top of a tag AFAICT. The guideline also don't seem to have taken into account the difference between lightweight and annotated tags, because - as discussed in the thread I referred to earlier, https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2014-September/010288.html - 'parse-rev' doesn't give you a commit ID for an annotated tag, it gives you the tag object's ID. But neither of those makes a difference to that justification (or the file mtime justification). I just checked and you can edit both annotated tags and github 'Releases' after creating them, so neither is immutable. And github still generates the tarballs on the fly, so they have their mtime set to whenever you download them. I'm probably not willing to get up on the horse and challenge the 'tags are mutable' rationale for not allowing github-generated tag tarballs, so I'll respect the apparent intent of the existing guideline and switch to a commit-based tarball (grmph). The wording about If the upstream does create tarballs you should use them, when read in context in #233, appears to have been added by Toshio as he was worried the guideline would be read as applying to *any project hosted in github* even if it maintained a release archive with curated tarballs. I suppose the guideline still needs updating to provide a correct command for finding the commit ID for annotated tags, and perhaps to clarify this stuff since we (or at least I...) seem to keep tripping over it. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #19 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- OK, revised (hopefully) one more time: Spec URL: https://www.happyassassin.net/reviews/php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper/php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper.spec SRPM URL: https://www.happyassassin.net/reviews/php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper/php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper-1.0.1-1.fc22.src.rpm Using github commit ID this time, and globals for the namespacing tweaked *again* so directory ownership should be right now. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #20 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- Yes all is about immutable source URL... [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. SHOULD [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). === APPROVED === -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@famillecollet.com --- Comment #2 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- (In reply to Adam Williamson (Fedora) from comment #1) We still haven't (I don't think?) decided on an official strategy for packaging and unbundling PSR-4 autoloaded libraries. I think PSR-4 have no sense ;) So common practice (for already some packaged libraries) is to restore / provides PSR-0 tree As IniGetWrapper.php provides bantu\IniGetWrapper\IniGetWrapper Should be installed as /usr/share/php/bantu/IniGetWrapper/IniGetWrapper.php (and /usr/share/php/bantu/ini-get-wrapper/src/IniGetWrapper.php seems messy ;) Additional tips sed -e 's,colors=true,colors=false = no more needed with latest version ;) -d date.timezone=UTC = also no more needed -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #3 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- (In reply to Adam Williamson (Fedora) from comment #1) The 'autoloader' for purpose of running the unit tests is of course ridiculous and would break the moment upstream touches pretty much anything. I use a lot the phpab command which allow to create a very simple autoloader. For example, for this library: $ phpab --output bootstrap.php --exclude *Test.php --basedir . src tests phpab 1.16.2 - Copyright (C) 2009 - 2014 by Arne Blankerts Scanning directory src Scanning directory tests Autoload file bootstrap.php generated. $ phpunit --bootstrap bootstrap.php PHPUnit 4.4.0 by Sebastian Bergmann. Configuration read from /tmp/php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper-1.0.1-1.fc22.src/php-ini-get-wrapper-1.0.1/phpunit.xml.dist Time: 55 ms, Memory: 4.75Mb OK (60 tests, 60 assertions) In some case, it could even make sense to provide a generated autoload.php, which could make it simpler for consumers of the library (see all the PHPUnit stack for example). $ phpab --output src/autoload.php src At least, this autoloader is correct (not like the tricky composer one, which is not even not PSR-0 compliant...) -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #4 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- I forget to say, big plus for using a PSR-0 tree, it can be used by PSR-0 and PSR-4 autoloaders ;) -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #5 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- My only real problem with PSR-0ing PSR-4 libraries is, as I said in email, that we can't entirely rely on them being uniquely named purely by class path, or about upstream caring if we do wind up hitting collisions (because they'll just say 'oh, well, it's named by composer vendor'). But if you want to do that, we can go for it until the problem happens ;) At least PSR-4 requires the classes to be namespaced, which helps. It may never happen. I forget to say, big plus for using a PSR-0 tree, it can be used by PSR-0 and PSR-4 autoloaders ;) As I read it, this isn't strictly true. PSR-4: When loading a file that corresponds to a fully qualified class name ... A contiguous series of one or more leading namespace and sub-namespace names, not including the leading namespace separator, in the fully qualified class name (a namespace prefix) corresponds to at least one base directory. It requires one or more namespace and sub-namespace names to corresponds to at least one base directory. By my reading, loading a class strictly by class path isn't part of PSR-4, and you could write a PSR-4 autoloader which didn't do it. The Composer autoloader, which is the one we're going to encounter most often, (optionally) does, though, of course. (I agree with you that PSR-4 is a horrible thing, apart from anything else you could drive a bus through the ambiguities and assumptions in the spec...) Thanks for the phpab tip, I'd seen that in a spec or two but forgot :) I'll submit a revised version with PSR-0 layout and phpab loader, and the phpunit changes (I stole them from a spec I had lying around, as you can probably guess). -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #6 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- spec updated, new .src.rpm: https://www.happyassassin.net/reviews/php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper/php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper-1.0.1-1.fc21.src.rpm (fc21 not fc22, building from my laptop). -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #7 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- I really think PSR-4 have no collision risk. All libraries/classes name use a prefix vendor (as in PSR-0, even if some libraries doesn't have it...) PSR-4 is only a shorcut for distribution (simplified src tree) PSR4: you find vendor\floo classes in /usr/share/php/vendor/foo so vendor\foo\bar = /usr/share/php/vendor/foo/bar.php PSR-0 you find vendor\floo classes in /usr/share/php so vendor\foo\bar = /usr/share/php/vendor/foo/bar.php PSR-4 have just dropped the compat case for not namespaced classes (from old PEAR 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773
--- Comment #8 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com ---
Quick notes:
I understand why you were confused by PSR-4: you forget the vendor part in
the installation tree ;)
%global php_vendor bantu
%global php_namespace %{php_vendor}/IniGetWrapper
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/php/%{php_namespace}
cp -pr src/* %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/php/%{php_namespace}
%files
...
%{_datadir}/php/%{php_vendor}
From PHP Guidelines =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PHP#Composer_registered_Packages
Packages must not require any php-pear(foo),
but should use php-composer(pear/foo).
This is designed to be able to follow pear requirement, and when pear will
totally disappear.
So
-BuildRequires: php-pear(pear.phpunit.de/PHPUnit)
+BuildRequires: php-phpunit-PHPUnit
or
+BuildRequires: %{_bindir}/phpunit
(php-composer(phpunit/phpunit) is not yet provided in all branches, and the
library is not really required, so I think BR the command is the better)
From FPC approved Guidelines, even if I think Wiki have never been updated...
:(
= https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411
%{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc}
%license LICENSE
From https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github
Source0 should use commit (4770c7feab370c62e23db4f31c112b7c6d90aee2) not the
tag (v1.0.1)
Please use %{?dist} instead of %{dist}, at least, to make fedora-review happy
;)
--
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #9 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- I understand why you were confused by PSR-4: you forget the vendor part in the installation tree ;) Huh. Well, no, I didn't forget it - I was sure I checked the source and it was just namespace IniGetWrapper . But now I look at it again and it's not. Odd. I'd say PSR-4 does not really require the library be namespaced by vendor. It only strictly requires it to have a namespace. It says the top-level namespace is also known as a vendor namespace, but doesn't really make the leap to *requiring* the top-level namespace name to be a 'vendor'. It only strictly requires a top-level namespace and a class name. Quote: A fully qualified class name has the following form: \NamespaceName(\SubNamespaceNames)*\ClassName The fully qualified class name MUST have a top-level namespace name, also known as a vendor namespace. The fully qualified class name MAY have one or more sub-namespace names. The fully qualified class name MUST have a terminating class name. But we're not really discussing the review, at this point...:) On the github thing, frankly I find the policy extremely ambiguous, and I'm not really sure which way to read it. It says: Github provides a mechanism to create tarballs on demand, either from a specific commit revision, or from a specific tag. If the upstream does not create tarballs for releases, you can use this mechanism to produce them. If the upstream does create tarballs you should use them as tarballs provide an easier trail for people auditing the packages. There's a thread on packaging list: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2014-September/010288.html I used to read it as requiring the use of a commit id for all github sources, but I'm really not so sure any more, as that seems a fairly absurd policy and I'm not sure it was ever the intent. The v1.0.1.tar.gz tarball comes from the releases page: https://github.com/bantuXorg/php-ini-get-wrapper/releases I really think the bit of the guideline about If the upstream does not create tarballs and If the upstream does create tarballs needs clarifying, I don't find it at all easy to interpret. I really kind of hate those commit ID tarballs and would much prefer to use the v1.0.1.tar.gz one if at all possible. I'll fix up the other bits, thanks (I haven't been following FPC changes lately, I did have a quick look at the review guidelines the other day and I don't think the license thing has been changed). -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com --- Comment #10 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- spot: can you clarify the intent of the github Source0 policy? is it not allowed to use https://github.com/bantuXorg/php-ini-get-wrapper/archive/v1.0.1.tar.gz ? 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #11 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net --- new spec and .src.rpm up with things other than the tarball addressed; I'm leaving the tarball as-is for now pending clarification. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com --- Comment #12 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- Created attachment 968360 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=968360action=edit phpci.log phpCompatInfo version 3.7.0 static analyze results -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 --- Comment #13 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- Created attachment 968361 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=968361action=edit review.txt Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #14 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- MUST [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/php/bantu [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/php/bantu SHOULD [!]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). Directory ownership is the only blocker. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1173773] Review Request: php-bantu-ini-get-wrapper - Convenience wrapper around PHP's ini_get() function
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173773
--- Comment #1 from Adam Williamson (Fedora) adamw+fed...@happyassassin.net
---
This is one of the new 3rdparty deps that ownCloud 8.x will require, I'm trying
to get out ahead of them.
We still haven't (I don't think?) decided on an official strategy for packaging
and unbundling PSR-4 autoloaded libraries. However, one possibility is perhaps
to do something with Composer's ${vendorDir} setting. If you look at
composer/autoload_psr4.php for ownCloud 3rdparty git master, you see:
$vendorDir = dirname(dirname(__FILE__));
$baseDir = $vendorDir;
return array(
'bantu\\IniGetWrapper\\' = array($vendorDir .
'/bantu/ini-get-wrapper/src'),
'Punic\\' = array($vendorDir . '/punic/punic/code'),
);
so I decided as a first cut to install this package such that the path
/bantu/ini-get-wrapper/src - that is, /(vendor)/(name)/(PSR-4 base directory) -
is valid relative to /usr/share/php . As a first cut that sort of intuitively
feels like the most appropriate thing to do, to me.
The 'autoloader' for purpose of running the unit tests is of course ridiculous
and would break the moment upstream touches pretty much anything. A more
elegant approach would, I suppose, be to have some sort of PSR-4 autoloader
implementation available for this kind of purpose, and some scriptlets to use
it in a particular package build.
--
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
