https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1245958
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System ---
golang-github-coreos-pkg-0-0.6.git2c77715.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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1245958
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from gil
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
--- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #3)
> I don't think any of this is blocking...
>
> (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #2)
> > Issues:
> >
> > [!]: If (and only if) the source pac
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
--- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
I don't think any of this is blocking...
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #2)
> Issues:
>
> [!]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
> license(s) in its
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
--- Comment #9 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
Updated.
Thanks for the review so far, I think the package is in much better shape now
;)
Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/neurord.spec
SRPM URL:
http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
--- Comment #8 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #6)
> All changes implemented as requested.
>
> Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/neurord.spec
> SRPM URL:
> http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286467
--- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo ---
Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/curvesapi.spec
SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/curvesapi-1.03-2.fc23.src.rpm
- add license headers
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment|0 |1
#1142397 is|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
--- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
All changes implemented as requested.
Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/neurord.spec
SRPM URL:
http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/neurord-3.0.0-3.20160317gitb17d063.src.rpm
koji: http
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322168
--- Comment #4 from Honggang LI ---
http://people.redhat.com/honli/.4086432554aa23141c867df686b977fd/ibacm.spec
http://people.redhat.com/honli/.4086432554aa23141c867df686b977fd/review.txt
http://people.redhat.com/honli/.4086432554aa23141c867df
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322168
--- Comment #3 from Honggang LI ---
(In reply to Michal Schmidt from comment #2)
> > %global _hardened_build 1
>
> This is actually the default setting since Fedora 23:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Harden_All_Packages
> I see the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322596
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/simple-ccsm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about ch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321042
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-RDF-Trine
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1306945
--- Comment #19 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/ohc
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316284
--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-htmlmin
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286467
--- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3)
> (In reply to Tomas Repik from comment #2)
> > = Issues =
> >
> > [!]: License headers in some files missing. I've seen that you have made a
> > pull req
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316196
--- Comment #9 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #8)
> Side note: package was retired because it did not build for two releases.
> Now it builds again, so that reason is gone. So that's good.
>
> Summ
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716
--- Comment #68 from Fedora Update System ---
cjdns-17.3-10.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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268716
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305390
Bug 1305390 depends on bug 1305382, which changed state.
Bug 1305382 Summary: Review Request: tristripper - Triangle stripification
(algorithm by Tanguy Fautre)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305382
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305382
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305382
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
dreamchess-tools-0-0.2.20141101gitf8f32aa.fc23, tristripper-1.10-2.fc23 has
been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist,
please make note of it in this bug report.
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305390
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System ---
dreamchess-tools-0-0.2.20141101gitf8f32aa.fc23, tristripper-1.10-2.fc23 has
been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist,
please make note of it in this bug report.
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1323010
Referenced Bugs:
https://bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316196
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
|shrin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
--- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo ---
Created attachment 1142397
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1142397&action=edit
jhdf5 maven depmap
This is a proposed spec file for jhdf5
- generate maven depmap and javadoc
- add javado
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322846
--- Comment #2 from Mukundan Ragavan ---
I will follow the blog. Once you remove NotReady tag, I will review this right
away.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316196
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
See Also|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829745
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
--- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo ---
Issues:
[!]: 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from gil catta
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
--- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo ---
These plugins/BuildRequires are installed by default and should be removed
BuildRequires: java-devel
BuildRequires: maven-compiler-plugin
BuildRequires: maven-install-plugin
BuildRequires: maven-jar-plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316196
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
--- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo ---
Some problem must be solved before continue/strat with the review:
- disable/remove maven-shade-plugin, is not safe bundle system libraries
- scope system and systemPath are not supported instead open a bu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG)
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318873
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||punto...@libero.it
Assignee|no
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||punto...@libero.it
Assignee|no
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1202470
--- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo ---
Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/validator-htmlparser.spec
SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/validator-htmlparser-1.4-1.fc23.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC l
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1276941 (fedora-neuro)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315912
Bug 1315912 depends on bug 1315910, which changed state.
Bug 1315910 Summary: Review Request: python-libarchive-c - Python interface to
libarchive
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315910
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315910
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315912
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322993
Bug ID: 1322993
Summary: Review Request: python-cma - Covariance Matrix
Adaptation Evolution Strategy numerical optimizer
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Packag
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286467
--- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Tomas Repik from comment #2)
> = Issues =
>
> [!]: License headers in some files missing. I've seen that you have made a
> pull request solving this issue, I'd wait a bit until it's pr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
--- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter ---
pkgdb request submitted
--
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
__
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|Package Review |Package Review
Version|epel7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Rex D
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
--- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter ---
build fails
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13520577
I suspect we may need to use cmake3 here?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
--- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter ---
Looks good, based mostly on fedora package (with only qt5 bits of course).
naming: ok
sources: ok
license: ok
scriptlets: ok
macros: ok
Waiting for scratch build...
--
You are receiving this mail beca
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
--- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter ---
While we're on the topic, won't you need a phonon-qt5-backend (gstreamer) pkg
too ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|Package Review |Package Review
Version|rawhide
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320725
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
--- Comment #12 from Andrew John Hughes ---
(In reply to Severin Gehwolf from comment #9)
> [!] Please remove FIXME comment:
>
> #FIXME
> #--with-jvm-variants=core \
>
I suspect this may be related to why a Zero build is the re
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305365
--- Comment #11 from Raphael Groner ---
Spec URL:
https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/java/testing/concurrentunit.spec
SRPM URL:
https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/java/testing/concurrentunit-0.4.2-2.fc23.src.rpm
Task info: http://ko
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1312015
--- Comment #22 from Raphael Groner ---
Okay, we're getting closer to an approval. Thanks for your patience.
. We need 'BuildRequires: ant java-devel jpackage-utils'. But do not add
something of that as Requires in javadoc subpackage, means r
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
--- Comment #11 from Severin Gehwolf ---
Created attachment 1142276
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1142276&action=edit
rpmlint output run on java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32-headless,
java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32, java-1.8.0-openj
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
--- Comment #10 from Severin Gehwolf ---
Created attachment 1142275
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1142275&action=edit
rpmlint output run on the spec file.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
--- Comment #9 from Severin Gehwolf ---
Here is the first round of review feedback:
Package Review
==
[!] URL in spec should be:
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/aarch32-port/
[!] spec file name does not match package name. ja
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
--- Comment #8 from Severin Gehwolf ---
/builddir/build/BUILD/java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32-1.8.0.tip-3.tip.fc24.arm/openjdk/hotspot/make/linux/makefiles/vm.make:309:
Building precompiled.hpp.gch
/usr/bin/g++ -DLINUX -D_GNU_SOURCE -DCC_INTERP -D
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322168
--- Comment #2 from Michal Schmidt ---
> %global _hardened_build 1
This is actually the default setting since Fedora 23:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Harden_All_Packages
I see the Packaging Guidelines don't mention that fact, but a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286467
--- Comment #2 from Tomas Repik ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= Issues =
[!]: License headers in some files missing. I've seen that you have made a pull
r
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1317184
Randy Barlow changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315134
Randy Barlow changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319521
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Rex D
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319521
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1312015
--- Comment #21 from jiri vanek ---
Spec URL:
https://jvanek.fedorapeople.org/offlinesearch/v3/javadocofflinesearch.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jvanek.fedorapeople.org/offlinesearch/v3/javadocofflinesearch-2.2-1.fc23.src.rpm
and ... https://jvane
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315870
Neil Horman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(dennis.dalessandr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1312015
--- Comment #20 from jiri vanek ---
wget
https://github.com/judovana/JavadocOfflineSearch/archive/JavadocOfflineSearch-2.2.tar.gz
sha256sum JavadocOfflineSearch-2.2.tar.gz
72a6314fa9146dfe5b3908fc9dcf06670aa4dcba48744ea0b60d64ecf5719ceb
Ja
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304632
Honggang LI changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(nhor...@redhat.co |needinfo?(kh...@redhat.com)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304632
Neil Horman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322846
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard||NotReady
--- Comment #1 from Antonio
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322846
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322846
Bug ID: 1322846
Summary: Review Request: SuperLUMT - Single precision real
SuperLU routines for shared memory parallel machines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988667
--- Comment #22 from Raphael Groner ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #21)
…
> Version appears to be 0.30, not 0.30.0 (so the tarball URL works).
That's what is meant with vala api version. It changes in conjunction wit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988667
--- Comment #21 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
(In reply to Gergely Polonkai from comment #17)
> Created attachment 1142088 [details]
> .spec file for valadoc 0.30
>
> (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #16)
> > In ord
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
Andrew John Hughes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ahug...@redhat.com
--- Comment #
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305365
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305365
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||punto...@libero.it
Blocks|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305650
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System ---
uispec4j-2.5-0.2.20150412gitfdc0b42.fc24 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-e2e4c0ac0c
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305650
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System ---
uispec4j-2.5-0.2.20150412gitfdc0b42.fc23 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-c44e5407a7
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1312939
--- Comment #12 from Remi Collet ---
Update to 1.3.5:
https://github.com/remicollet/remirepo/commit/b568c0c9f7fb4a5f8bc46891cca3b9991c41da0b
Spec:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/remicollet/remirepo/b568c0c9f7fb4a5f8bc46891cca3b9991c41da0b/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1312015
--- Comment #19 from Raphael Groner ---
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Versioned_licenses
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are alwa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305365
--- Comment #9 from Wolfgang Ulbrich ---
From my point of view the Apache Software License 2.0 is fine, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses
But it looks like that upstream has forgotten to add a head
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321042
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322596
leigh scott changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from leig
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286467
Tomas Repik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tre...@redhat.com
Assignee|nob.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
--- Comment #6 from jiri vanek ---
I was hoping upstream will tag. They did not.
So probabky as you suggested on IRC - to provide list of hashes:(
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
--- Comment #5 from Severin Gehwolf ---
%global revisiontip
How do you intend to solve the reproducible sources issue?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318059
--- Comment #10 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Stefan Nuxoll from comment #9)
> I know this isn't the only noarched package to support global plugin
> installation like this. Perhaps a patch to force the plugindir to be
> /usr/lib/moritu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307200
--- Comment #12 from Daniel Vrátil ---
No. In Fedora <= 23 we ship kdepim 4.14.x in package "kdepim" based on Qt4 and
KDE4 (called usually "KDEPIM4"), which includes KJots and all the other KDE PIM
applications. In F24 we updated to kdepim 15.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
Severin Gehwolf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--
You are receivin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305650
--- Comment #21 from jiri vanek ---
Those are worthy links. Thank you for inclusion.
--
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988
Severin Gehwolf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sgehw...@redhat.com
--- Comment #4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988667
--- Comment #20 from Raphael Groner ---
. Folders ownership is not correct.
%files
%{_libdir}/%{name}/
%files data
%dir %{_datadir}/valadoc/
%package devel
Requires: vala-devel%{?_isa}
(for %{_datadir}/vala/ )
. I'm not sure, must the packa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988667
--- Comment #19 from Raphael Groner ---
Again, some general advice:
. You must use '%license COPYING', remove '%doc COPYING' instead.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
. There's no license for the sub p
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988667
--- Comment #18 from Raphael Groner ---
Can you upload the spec and srpm files to some external web space, e.g.
fedorapeople.org? Someone could then use fedora-review tool.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Contributor
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988667
Gergely Polonkai changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment|0 |1
#1129723 is|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1314974
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307200
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
