[Bug 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #1 from Till Hofmann --- Spec URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/dex-autostart.spec SRPM URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/dex-autostart-0.8-0.2.20150714gita98fa2f.fc22.src.rpm LICENSE was installed twice, remove second LICENSE file. koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10355294 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 Marcin Haba changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marcin.h...@bacula.pl --- Comment #2 from Marcin Haba --- Hello, In manual page there is described "dex" command. EXAMPLES manual section also uses "dex" e.g: dex -a -s /etc/xdg/autostart/:~/.config/autostart/ When is already installed "dex" text editor package (not dex-autostart) package, then the commands from dex-autostart manual be using /usr/bin/dex binary instead of /usr/bin/dex-autostart I think that better could be just replace "dex" in man page into "dex-autostart". -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #3 from Till Hofmann --- Spec URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/dex-autostart.spec SRPM URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/dex-autostart-0.8-0.3.20150714gita98fa2f.fc22.src.rpm Thanks for spotting this. I've tried to fix this in a way such that it could be merged upstream, but it seems like sphinx doesn't really support variables for man page names. So instead, I simply substitute s/dex/dex-autostart/g on the generated man page. koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10488467 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #4 from Marcin Haba --- Hello, @Till: Thanks for add the substring change to Spec file. The package builds well on my side and manual looks OK either. Here are two minor notes: 1) I checked that dex-autostart works with python3 and does not work with python2. From this reason I propose to add a "Requires" tag python >= 3.4 or something similar with relation to Python3. This change will give clear info (also for packagers from other distributions) that dex-autostart works with Python3 and higher. 2) Result RPM contains: /usr/share/doc/dex-autostart/README.rst in which content are texts and examples about 'dex' instead of 'dex-autostart'. I propose to use the same way as you used in case manual, or just exclude this file and do not add the README file to RPM due to containing almost the same information as manual contains. After applying above changes, I prepare informal review form and past the results here. -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #5 from Marcin Haba --- One more thing. I have seen that dex-autostart has a tests suit (doctest available to execute via --test switcher and visible tests results in verbose mode -v). I think that nice might be to add these tests call in %check section, according to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Test_Suites -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #6 from Till Hofmann --- Spec URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/dex-autostart.spec SRPM URL: https://thofmann.fedorapeople.org/dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc22.src.rpm koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10506514 Thanks for the comments! I've added python3 as requirement. This should be sufficient. (I thought the requirement would be detected automatically, but I actually never checked). I've added a substitution for the README to rename dex to dex-autostart. I wasn't aware of the included doctest, I've added a check section. -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061
--- Comment #7 from Marcin Haba ---
Hello,
I performed informal review. Here are review results:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
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]: 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.
[-]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: 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]: 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 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:
[-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= 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.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unles
[Bug 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #8 from Marcin Haba --- @Till: I am not able to do nothing more in this task. What do you think about ask somebody from Fedora packages maintainers about perform formal review? Then the task will move forward. -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #9 from Till Hofmann --- First of all: Thanks for the informal review! Maybe somebody will pick up the review and do the formal review. If not, I'll ask on fedora-devel for a review or a review swap. -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 Till Hofmann changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||Trivial -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it Flags||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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo --- hi can you take for me one of these? springframework-data-redis - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228203 apacheds-jdbm - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243758 thanks in advance -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #11 from gil cattaneo ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
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". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1243061-dex-
autostart/licensecheck.txt
IGNORE: dex-4bbd9f95ed3470b542a1a2c6dad56f31806cd8fa/man/conf.py is use only
by python-sphinx for generate manpage
[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]: 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 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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: 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]: 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 use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[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.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[?]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[Bug 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo --- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 Till Hofmann changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Till Hofmann --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: dex-autostart Short Description: Generate and execute DesktopEntry files Upstream URL: https://github.com/jceb/dex Owners: thofmann Branches: f21 f22 f23 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #14 from Till Hofmann --- Thank you for the 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla --- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 Jon Ciesla 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc21 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 21. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.\nIf you want to test the update, you can install it with \n su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update dex-autostart'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-14142 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.\nIf you want to test the update, you can install it with \n su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update dex-autostart'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-14141 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.\nIf you want to test the update, you can install it with \n su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update dex-autostart'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-14143 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9. ||fc23 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2015-09-03 06:03:51 -- 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 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1243061] Review Request: dex-autostart - Generate and execute DesktopEntry files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243061 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- dex-autostart-0.8-0.4.20150728git4bbd9f9.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. If problems still persist, 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
