[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

José Matos  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-08-27 19:44:07



-- 
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #25 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
Thanks, Filipe, that is awesome of you!

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #23 from Filipe Rosset  ---
(In reply to Hannes Frederic Sowa from comment #21)
> I just requested the appropriate branches (again). Let's see. I try to push
> them asap.

Hi Hannes, I pushed to all current branches (master, f28, f27, f26 and epel7)
and build an update to datamash-1.3

I think we can go ahead and close this ticket.

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #24 from Filipe Rosset  ---
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=24577

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

Filipe Rosset  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rosset.fil...@gmail.com



--- Comment #22 from Filipe Rosset  ---
I requested branches for f26 and f27 (f28, epel7 and master are OK)

https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5949
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/5950

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #21 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
I just requested the appropriate branches (again). Let's see. I try to push
them asap.

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #20 from Dave Love  ---
I expected it to be built for all the current releases, and the review bug to
get auto-closed.
(I was actually after it for EPEL.)

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

Hannes Frederic Sowa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||hs...@redhat.com



--- Comment #19 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
Hi Dave, oh, I see it hadn't build for f27. I need to take care of that. It is
in rawhide already though.

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #18 from Dave Love  ---
Why hasn't this been finished off?  I was expecting to be able to install 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #17 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/datamash

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

Hannes Frederic Sowa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jama...@fc.up.pt



--- Comment #16 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
Jose, I assigned the ticket to you, it seems I need to do this for requesting a
repository.

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #15 from José Matos  ---
Now that the package is approved the author suggests that a new release (1.2)
will follow soon. :-)

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

José Matos  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #14 from José Matos  ---
The package is approved.
The details follow:

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]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
[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.
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
 /usr/share/bash-completion
 (unar, kmod, licensecheck, libmbim, rpmdevtools,
 python2-pip, rpmlint, libqmi, ModemManager, bash-completion, tracker,
 yum, dnf, python3-pip, fedpkg, cmake-data, glib2, git-core, lightdm),
 /usr/share/bash-completion/completions(unar, kmod, licensecheck,
 libmbim, rpmdevtools, python2-pip, rpmlint, libqmi, ModemManager,
 firewalld, libappstream-glib, dnf, tracker, yum, bash-completion,
 python3-pip, fedpkg, cmake-data, glib2, git-core, lightdm)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
 Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[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]: Texinfo files are installed using install-info in %post and %preun if
 package has .info files.
 Note: Texinfo .info file(s) in datamash
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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 71680 bytes in 7 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]: 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]: 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 

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #13 from José Matos  ---
I am the reviewer. :-)

And I was happy to see the discussion.

One note, when you update the spec file you should update the release number.
That helps the reviewer (and is present in the guidelines for submission).
Please do not forget that in a next submission.

For the moment I will review the version that you published in comment #10.

I will send the full review either today or tomorrow morning (UTC FWIW). :-)

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #12 from Dave Love  ---
(In reply to Hannes Frederic Sowa from comment #11)
> Ping. Dave, do you have any other comments?

Not more that it builds on el6 (the koji el6-candidate target, though I used
mock). I'm not the reviewer, though.

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #11 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
Ping. Dave, do you have any other comments?

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #10 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
Sorry for the late reply. I was on the road for some time.

(In reply to Dave Love from comment #9)
> Of course you can use the changes.  I don't think it's necessary to
> attribute changes from a review, and they're not copyright-significant.
> 
> Have you seen the discussion on fedora-devel about un-versioned bundled
> provides?

I just added your patch to the spec file and refreshed the source rpm as well
the spec file in its initial location.

Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~hsowa/datamash.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~hsowa/datamash-1.1.1-1.fc25.src.rpm

F26: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20521975
F25: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20521994
EPEL7: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20522005
rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20522110

I couldn't figure out which target is for epel6. :/

What do you think?

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #9 from Dave Love  ---
Of course you can use the changes.  I don't think it's necessary to attribute
changes from a review, and they're not copyright-significant.

Have you seen the discussion on fedora-devel about un-versioned bundled
provides?

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #8 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
Hi,

(In reply to Dave Love from comment #6)
> (In reply to Hannes Frederic Sowa from comment #5)
> > Do I need to add a version to bundled(gnulib)? rpmlint complains right now.
> 
> Yes, I noticed that.  You can't add a version, as it doesn't have one.
> I'd just note/explain the error in the spec file.

According to rpm --whatprovides 'bundled(gnulib)' at least some libraries
specify version attributes. I just couldn't figure out yet how they do it.

> You don't need to remove buildroot in %install these days, but it doesn't
> hurt.

Yep, I understood. I did it for grepability and cosmetic reasons. ;)

> Also the packaging guidelines say not to use macros like %_rm

I will change that.

> > Dave, I would love to make this package compatible to EPEL. I am going to
> > read into that but feel free to dump any links on me. :)
> 
> I'll attach a patch.  I realize it's only really for el6, but _I think_ the
> location for completions should be changed on others, as in the patch.
> Otherwise the diff is mostly moot.  (I don't know if using pkg-config is the
> right
> way to get the completions directory.)  Handling completions should be in
> packaging guidelines.
> You do need to own the completions directories with %dir anyhow, which I
> patched in.
> 
> Hope that helps, and apologies if I'm stepping on reviewer toes.

No no, any help is welcome. Thanks a lot for the patch. Can I just use it and
apply it to my version? How can I attribute your help in the spec file
correctly?

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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #7 from Dave Love  ---
Created attachment 1295270
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1295270=edit
spec patch

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #6 from Dave Love  ---
(In reply to Hannes Frederic Sowa from comment #5)
> Do I need to add a version to bundled(gnulib)? rpmlint complains right now.

Yes, I noticed that.  You can't add a version, as it doesn't have one.
I'd just note/explain the error in the spec file.

You don't need to remove buildroot in %install these days, but it doesn't hurt.
Also the packaging guidelines say not to use macros like %_rm

> Dave, I would love to make this package compatible to EPEL. I am going to
> read into that but feel free to dump any links on me. :)

I'll attach a patch.  I realize it's only really for el6, but _I think_ the
location for completions should be changed on others, as in the patch.
Otherwise the diff is mostly moot.  (I don't know if using pkg-config is the
right
way to get the completions directory.)  Handling completions should be in
packaging guidelines.
You do need to own the completions directories with %dir anyhow, which I
patched in.

Hope that helps, and apologies if I'm stepping on reviewer toes.

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #5 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
I updated the files in place.

I changed:

* removed info from BR
* added perl(Digest::MD5) perl(Digest::SHA) perl(Data::Dumper) to BR
* added Provides: bundled(gnulib) [do I need to include a version here? -
rpmlint complains]
* added Requires(preun): info
* consistently using %{buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
* added %check make check
* bash_completion is not a %config file
* added license and doc files

Do I need to add a version to bundled(gnulib)? rpmlint complains right now.

rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20366919
F25: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20366933

Could you have another look?

Dave, I would love to make this package compatible to EPEL. I am going to read
into that but feel free to dump any links on 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #4 from Hannes Frederic Sowa  ---
(In reply to José Matos from comment #2)
> Taking care of the review.
> 
> According to fedora-review the package has the following issues:
> 
> - Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
>   Note: Bundled gnulib but no Provides: bundled(gnulib)
>   See:
>  
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
> No_Bundled_Libraries#Requirement_if_you_bundle
> - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
>   are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
>   Note: These BR are not needed: info
>   See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
> - Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>   Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>   See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#macros
> 
> Could you comment/take care of this, please?

I will. Thanks for the review. I upload a new specs and srpm new.

I also should mention that this my first RPM in fedora, but I already found a
sponsor (lrintel).

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

Dave Love  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||dave.l...@manchester.ac.uk



--- Comment #3 from Dave Love  ---
Some comments, as I intended to get round to re-submitting this:

It needs
Requires(preun): info

The licence isn't installed, and there's an empty %doc.

It should run make check (and BR perl(Digest::MD5) perl(Digest::SHA)
perl(Data::Dumper)).

I don't think the completion file should be %config.  [The packaging guide
could use instructions for completions.]

Can I interest you in changes for completion installation on EPEL?

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

José Matos  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jama...@fc.up.pt
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #2 from José Matos  ---
Taking care of the review.

According to fedora-review the package has the following issues:

- Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
  Note: Bundled gnulib but no Provides: bundled(gnulib)
  See:
 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Requirement_if_you_bundle
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: info
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
  Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#macros

Could you comment/take care of this, please?

-- 
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

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #1 from Yanko Kaneti  ---
*** Bug 1466960 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
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