[Bug 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-grape-4.6.1-1.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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-10-31 22:29:25 -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-grape-4.6.1-1.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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-grape-4.6.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update gap-pkg-grape' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-253cb707ea -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-grape-4.6.1-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update gap-pkg-grape' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-906e055dc7 -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-grape-4.6.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-253cb707ea -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-grape-4.6.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-253cb707ea --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- gap-pkg-grape-4.6.1-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-906e055dc7 -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #5 from Jerry James --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > NON blocking issues: > [?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses > found: "Unknown or generated". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed > output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1273244-gap-pkg- > grape/licensecheck.txt > Please, inform upstream > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/ > LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification > Unknown or generated > > grape/doc/cnauty.tex > grape/doc/colour.tex > grape/doc/consmod.tex > grape/doc/constr.tex > grape/doc/determin.tex > grape/doc/grape.tex > grape/doc/inspect.tex > grape/doc/manual.tex > grape/doc/partlin.tex > grape/doc/special.tex I don't think there is any need to inform upstream of this. The license is clearly spelled out in doc/grape.tex, which is the master LaTeX file, so the license ends up in the generated PDF. Furthermore, the license is listed in the actual source files, lib/grape.g and lib/smallestimage.g, as well as in the top-level files COPYING and gpl.txt, and also mentioned in README. > gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/grape.g > gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-grape/gpl.txt > gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/smallestimage.g > Please, inform upstream > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address Yes, this is endemic in the GAP community. I think that GAP itself started out with the wrong address, and then various authors of GAP addons copied the license file from GAP itself, and so now we've got the wrong address everywhere. Argh. I will certainly inform upstream of this issue. Thank you very much 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > NON blocking issues: > > gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/grape.g > gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-grape/gpl.txt > gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/smallestimage.g > Please, inform upstream > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address forgotten these gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/grape.g gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-grape/gpl.txt gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/smallestimage.g -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo --- NON blocking issues: [?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1273244-gap-pkg- grape/licensecheck.txt Please, inform upstream https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification Unknown or generated grape/doc/cnauty.tex grape/doc/colour.tex grape/doc/consmod.tex grape/doc/constr.tex grape/doc/determin.tex grape/doc/grape.tex grape/doc/inspect.tex grape/doc/manual.tex grape/doc/partlin.tex grape/doc/special.tex gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/grape.g gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-grape/gpl.txt gap-pkg-grape.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/lib/gap/pkg/grape/lib/smallestimage.g Please, inform upstream https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244
--- Comment #2 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.
[?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1273244-gap-pkg-
grape/licensecheck.txt
Please, inform upstream
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification
Unknown or generated
grape/doc/cnauty.tex
grape/doc/colour.tex
grape/doc/consmod.tex
grape/doc/constr.tex
grape/doc/determin.tex
grape/doc/grape.tex
grape/doc/inspect.tex
grape/doc/manual.tex
grape/doc/partlin.tex
grape/doc/special.tex
[?]: 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
[-]: 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 20480 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]: 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]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[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.
[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
[Bug 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo --- can you take this one https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970285 for me? 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 1273244] Review Request: gap-pkg-grape - GRaph Algorithms using PErmutation groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273244 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
