[Bug 798202] Review Request: python-ldappool - A connection pool for python-ldap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798202 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@zarb.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 02:40:42 EDT --- Is the package for EPEL ? ( as there is BuildRoot and %clean ) Also : - BuildRequires on python-devel should say what version of python need to be used http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires - the license should be in %doc, and since there is no lincese upstream, you should ask upstream to add it - the snippet for %python_sitelib is likely uneeded ( unless need to be pushed to EPEL ) - there is no %dist in the release - if the source cannot be downloaded, packager should give instruction on how to do it http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Troublesome_URLs - there is no %check to run the tests - the source code speak of having a license GPL or LGPL or MPL, so triple license. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799521] Review Request: azove - Another Zero-One Vertex Enumeration tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799521 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 02:58:02 EDT --- Hi, rpmlint warn of : azove.i686: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/azove2 0775L Otherwise, the package seems to be good enough to start a formal review, I am working on it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727672] Review Request: metasploit-4.0 - The Metasploit Framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727672 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org Status Whiteboard||NotReady --- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 03:06:15 EDT --- Still 404, so I am marking the review as NotReady, remove it from WhiteBoard once the url is no longer 404 or forbidden. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 781260] Review Request: leechcraft - A Free Open Source Cross-Platform Modular Internet-Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781260 --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 03:02:48 EDT --- leechcraft-0.5.60-5.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/leechcraft-0.5.60-5.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794783] Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lemen...@gmail.com --- Comment #11 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 03:25:55 EDT --- What's the status of this ticket? So far this package failed to build on F-15 but builds fine (and already available in repositories) on F-16 and F-17. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=13343 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/search/xorg-x11-drv-modesetting I think we should close this ticket (I'm not sure that F-15 failure must block this ticket). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737972] Review Request: spacewalk-admin - Various utility scripts and data files for RHN Satellite installations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737972 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 03:28:04 EDT --- Hi, can you update the spec file for the latest release ( and the tarball for the version 1.6.X are missing ) ? also, a few note : - for a fedora rpm, BuildRoot is no longer needed, same goes for %defattr, and %clean, and cleaning of %install - you should use %global, not %define for %rhnroot http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define - you should consider using packages rather than filedesps, for reasons listed in the guideline : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Dependencies - you should also ( IMHO ) place requires on 1 line each, as it permit to have easier to read diff when sending patch - the file spacewalk-service look like a init script, and recent fedora use systemd, so the file should be converted http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Systemd -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737972] Review Request: spacewalk-admin - Various utility scripts and data files for RHN Satellite installations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737972 --- Comment #2 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 03:37:54 EDT --- Also, there is no file to give the license of the tarball, and you should ask upstream to add one : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713313] Review Request: msktutil - Program for interoperability with Active Directory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=713313 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@zarb.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #36 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 03:52:33 EDT --- Hi, is the package for EPEL 5 ? if not, you should remove %clean, the rm at beggining of %install and BuildRoot, cf http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707720] Review Request: batctl - B.A.T.M.A.N. advanced control and management tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707720
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@zarb.org
--- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 04:06:34 EDT ---
Hi,
can you update the package to the latest release so we can start the review ?
Also, :
- Buildroot should be removed, as this is no longer needed
- %doc should include the license ( and so you should ask upstream to ship the
license )
- rm -rf %{buildroot} in beggining of %install, %defattr and %clean are uneeded
for latest fedora
and more important, it seems the module is not compiled in fedora 16 kernel :/
( not blocking for review, but annoying for testing and usage, so I would
suggest asking to have it enabled ).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799521] Review Request: azove - Another Zero-One Vertex Enumeration tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799521 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@zarb.org Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 803082] Review Request: pogo - Probably the simplest and fastest audio player for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803082 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 04:53:51 EDT --- Do not know why the package was not set as ON_QA, but did it myself ( cf http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806355] Review Request: python-django-profiles - A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806355
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24
05:00:52 EDT ---
Thank you for the comments. I can't say, why the source was wrong. corrected.
Licence corrected, License file added :oopsie:
Install file dropped.
updated SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-profiles.spec
updated SRPM:
http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-profiles-0.2-4.fc17.src.rpm
[mrunge@sofja SPECS]$ diff -u python-django-profiles.spec-3
python-django-profiles.spec
--- python-django-profiles.spec-3 2012-03-23 15:24:08.0 +0100
+++ python-django-profiles.spec 2012-03-24 09:55:38.857739255 +0100
@@ -2,10 +2,10 @@
%global obs_ver 0.2-3
Name: python-django-profiles
Version:0.2
-Release:3%{?dist}
+Release:4%{?dist}
Summary:A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
-License:MIT
+License:BSD
URL:https://bitbucket.org/ubernostrum/%{pkgname}/
# wget https://bitbucket.org/ubernostrum/django-profiles/get/default.tar.bz2
-O django-profiles.tar.bz2
# md5sum django-profiles.tar.bz2
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
to `django-registration`, but has no other dependencies.
%prep
-%setup -q -n ubernostrum-django-profiles-default
+%setup -q -n ubernostrum-django-profiles-c21962558420
%build
@@ -41,15 +41,18 @@
%files
-%doc CHANGELOG.txt INSTALL.txt README.txt docs/*
+%doc CHANGELOG.txt README.txt LICENSE.txt docs/*
%{python_sitelib}/profiles
%{python_sitelib}/django_profiles*
%changelog
-* Fri Mar 23 2012 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de - 0.2-3
+* Sat Mar 24 2012 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de - 0.2-4
- rename to python-django-profiles
+- fix source md5sum
+- correct License-Tag
+- add License-file
* Fri Jan 13 2012 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 0.2-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_17_Mass_Rebuild
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798202] Review Request: python-ldappool - A connection pool for python-ldap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798202 --- Comment #2 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 05:18:55 EDT --- 1. i'm dropping EPEL (I lack motivation to maintain these branches) 2. fixed since i'm dropping EPEL 3. ticket submitted: https://github.com/mozilla-services/ldappool/issues/2 4. fixed since i'm dropping EPEL 5. fixed 6. fixed 7. since it requires an LDAP server (installed and configured), not planned to do so in the near future 8. fixed new spec and src.rpm: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/python-ldappool.spec http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/python-ldappool-1.0-0.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806355] Review Request: python-django-profiles - A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806355 --- Comment #3 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 05:55:03 EDT --- The md5sum from the tarball in the comment is still not the same as the one we get when downloading the comment. And are you sure that you should not download the 0.2 tarball instead, as the command in comment will download the tip ( but there is no functional change ) ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798202] Review Request: python-ldappool - A connection pool for python-ldap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798202
--- Comment #3 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 06:04:54 EDT ---
- Since the package is noarch, this line is useless :
export CFLAGS=%{optflags}
- you should use %global, not %define ( first line of the spec )
I am rebuilding it in mock and testing it, so the review should be quick once
these 2 items are fixed
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800797] Review Request: ghc-vault - Persistent store for typed values
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800797
Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2012-03-24
06:12:23 EDT ---
[+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
rpmlint -i ghc-vault-0.1.0.0-1.fc15.src.rpm
ghc-vault-devel-0.1.0.0-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm ghc-vault-0.1.0.0-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm
../ghc-vault.spec
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[+]MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+]MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[+]MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
Naming-Yes
Version-release - Matches
No prebuilt external bits - OK
Spec legibity - OK
Package template - OK
Arch support - OK
Libexecdir - OK
rpmlint - yes
changelogs - OK
Source url tag - OK, validated.
Build Requires list - OK
Summary and description - OK
API documentation - OK, in devel package
[+]MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[+]MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+]MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
LICENSE file is included.
[+]MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+]MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+]MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source,as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
md5sum vault-0.1.0.0.tar.gz
ad7762b8e221c40135303953aa0a8147 vault-0.1.0.0.tar.gz
md5sum ghc-vault-0.1.0.0-1.fc16.src/vault-0.1.0.0.tar.gz
ad7762b8e221c40135303953aa0a8147
ghc-vault-0.1.0.0-1.fc16.src/vault-0.1.0.0.tar.gz
[+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Built on x86_64.
[+]MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+]MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[+]MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
Checked with rpmquery --list
[NA]MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review.
[+]MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
Checked with rpmquery --whatprovides
[+]MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[+]MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
Checked with ls -lR
[+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content.
[+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+]MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[+]MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency: Requires: {name} = %{version}-%{release}
rpm -e ghc-vault
error: Failed dependencies:
ghc(vault-0.1.0.0) = 425918c5db54b7c35ef7ca0e2c05af80 is needed by (installed)
ghc-vault-devel-0.1.0.0-1.fc15.x86_64
ghc-vault = 0.1.0.0-1.fc15 is needed by (installed)
ghc-vault-devel-0.1.0.0-1.fc15.x86_64
[NA]MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section
[+]MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+]MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Should items
[+]SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[+]SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
Installs fine. Loaded Data.Vault.ST into ghci. Loads fine
[+]SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
cabal2spec-diff is OK.
APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798202] Review Request: python-ldappool - A connection pool for python-ldap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798202 --- Comment #4 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 06:39:53 EDT --- My bad, these two bummers are fixed new spec and src.rpm: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/python-ldappool.spec http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/python-ldappool-1.0-0.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 803148] Review Request: python-pycallgraph - A module that creates call graphs for Python programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803148 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798202] Review Request: python-ldappool - A connection pool for python-ldap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798202
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 06:52:11 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-]: MUST 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 %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: No licenses found! Please check the source files for licenses
manually.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint python-ldappool-1.0-0.fc18.noarch.rpm
python-ldappool.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) ldap - lap, leap,
dapple
python-ldappool.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ldap - lap,
leap, dapple
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
rpmlint python-ldappool-1.0-0.fc18.src.rpm
python-ldappool.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) ldap - lap, leap, dapple
python-ldappool.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ldap - lap, leap,
dapple
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/misc/checkout/git/FedoraReview/src/798202/ldappool-1.0.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 2f2f9ca14dc36b432d2acd379d196062
MD5SUM upstream package : 2f2f9ca14dc36b432d2acd379d196062
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]:
[Bug 668091] Review Request: ami-creator - Simple tool to create an image suitable for use as an EC2 AMI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668091 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 07:04:28 EDT --- The spec file is 404 :/ And I guess it should be updated : - new url on github - likely new tarball ( but you seems to not one tagged upstream ) - clean buildroot, %defattr, etc Are you still interested into it ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806355] Review Request: python-django-profiles - A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806355
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24
07:15:02 EDT ---
I'm very sorry. Double mistake! Off course, I should get the version 0.2
Later changes are just cosmetical.
SRPM:
http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-profiles-0.2-5.fc17.src.rpm
SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-profiles.spec
[mrunge@sofja SPECS]$ diff -u python-django-profiles.spec-4
python-django-profiles.spec
--- python-django-profiles.spec-4 2012-03-24 11:54:18.197209940 +0100
+++ python-django-profiles.spec 2012-03-24 12:08:30.180274641 +0100
@@ -2,14 +2,14 @@
%global obs_ver 0.2-3
Name: python-django-profiles
Version:0.2
-Release:4%{?dist}
+Release:5%{?dist}
Summary:A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
License:BSD
URL:https://bitbucket.org/ubernostrum/%{pkgname}/
-# wget https://bitbucket.org/ubernostrum/django-profiles/get/default.tar.bz2
-O django-profiles.tar.bz2
+# wget
https://bitbucket.org/ubernostrum/django-profiles/get/daac18511394.tar.bz2 -O
django-profiles.tar.bz2
# md5sum django-profiles.tar.bz2
-# 5a94560b95f64dc3b786701647876484 django-profiles.tar.bz2
+# aba786abdb5469b64d189931e3e4b7ea django-profiles.tar.bz2
Source0:django-profiles.tar.bz2
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
to `django-registration`, but has no other dependencies.
%prep
-%setup -q -n ubernostrum-django-profiles-c21962558420
+%setup -q -n ubernostrum-django-profiles-daac18511394
%build
@@ -48,11 +48,12 @@
%changelog
-* Sat Mar 24 2012 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de - 0.2-4
+* Sat Mar 24 2012 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de - 0.2-5
- rename to python-django-profiles
- fix source md5sum
- correct License-Tag
- add License-file
+- correct source file
* Fri Jan 13 2012 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 0.2-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_17_Mass_Rebuild
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] New: Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source
trees
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517
Summary: Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of
Python source trees
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: sanjay.an...@gmail.com
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Story Points: ---
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Spec URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pycscope/pycscope.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pycscope/pycscope-0.3-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description:
A python script to generate a cscope index from a Python source tree. %{name}
uses Python's own parser and AST to generate the index, so it is a bit more
accurate than plain cscope.
Rpmlint output:
[ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint pycscope-0.3-1.fc16.src.rpm
/var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64/result/*.rpm ../SPECS/pycscope.spec
pycscope.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cscope - scope, c scope, cs
cope
pycscope.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cscope - scope, c scope,
cs cope
pycscope.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cscope - scope, c scope, cs
cope
pycscope.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cscope - scope, c
scope, cs cope
pycscope.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pycscope.py
pycscope.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cscope - scope, c scope, cs
cope
pycscope.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cscope - scope, c scope,
cs cope
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
Koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3929056
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806516] New: Review Request: python-django-annoying - Eliminate annoying things in the Django framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-django-annoying - Eliminate annoying things in the Django framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806516 Summary: Review Request: python-django-annoying - Eliminate annoying things in the Django framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://kumarpraveen.fedorapeople.org/annoying/python-django-annoying.spec SRPM URL: http://kumarpraveen.fedorapeople.org/annoying/python-django-annoying-0.7.6-2.fc16.src.rpm Description: Django-annoying is a django application that tries to eliminate annoying things in the Django framework. koji Build : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3929062 rpmlint Output : rpmlint -i python-django-annoying.spec ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-django-annoying-0.7.6-2.fc16.src.rpm ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python-django-annoying-0.7.6-2.fc16.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Please note: this is a rename review request for an existing package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768700] Review Request: sugar-flip - Simple strategic game of flipping coins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768700 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sanjay.an...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 07:29:04 EDT --- Shall have this done by tomorrow max. I'm really sorry for the delay :/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798202] Review Request: python-ldappool - A connection pool for python-ldap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798202 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 07:39:21 EDT --- Thanks for the review ! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-ldappool Short Description: A connection pool for python-ldap Owners: hguemar Branches: f15 f16 f17 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799651] Review Request: smb4k-0.10.12 - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799651
--- Comment #7 from Sergio Monteiro Basto ser...@serjux.com 2012-03-24
08:36:46 EDT ---
Hi, I am back , I will update smb4k my propose to smb4k-1.0.1 today ,
I read comments here
I will try do :
- Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using
desktop-file-install file if it is a GUI application.
- devel package.
- and some other
Stay tuned
what command do you run with fedora-review ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 786249] Review Request: rubygem-puppet-lint - Tool to verify the style of puppet manifests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786249 --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 08:53:05 EDT --- Made the rpm compile on f17 ( but I am not sure it work fine on f16 now ) Spec URL: http://www.ephaone.org/~misc/specs/rubygem-puppet-lint.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ephaone.org/~misc/specs/rubygem-puppet-lint-0.1.12-1.fc17.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727410] Review Request: ghc-random - Haskell random number library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727410 Bug 727410 depends on bug 787357, which changed state. Bug 787357 Summary: ghc-7.4.1 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787357 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 --- Comment #11 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 09:21:03 EDT --- 1. the BSD license file has been removed (according INRIA, it is just a cruft) 2. the shlib-with-non-pic-code issue has been fixed in the master (I had to re-do the whole build system), since the patch is non trivial, a minor release will be done within next weeks. For the moment, i generated a post release tarball. Until the new download page is up, official tarball will be available on my personal page: http://graal.ens-lyon.fr/~hguemar/diet/archives/ 3. I pushed a tutorial on how testing DIET http://graal.ens-lyon.fr/~hguemar/diet/archives/diet-howto.rst 4. there's not much interest in having systemd services since each agent needs an unique name (and there is not necessarily one agent per machine). Probably, we need to have puppet/chef recipes for configuration in the long term. new spec and new src.rpm: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/diet/diet.spec http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/diet/diet-2.8.0-4.cd326f85f75cgit.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 754246] Review Request: TV-Browser - A TV Browsing application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754246 --- Comment #13 from Sven Baus s.bau...@gmx.net 2012-03-24 09:35:30 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) sven could you please publish your latest spec file + patches (if needed) so i can take a closer look? sorry for the delays, but i have been rather busy. SPEC: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3351272/Stuff/tvbrowser/SPECS/TV-Browser.spec I'm working on the dependencies, but I'm also as you are, a bit busy ;). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799651] Review Request: smb4k-0.10.12 - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799651 --- Comment #8 from Sergio Monteiro Basto ser...@serjux.com 2012-03-24 09:34:29 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.serjux.com/smb4k/smb4k.spec SRPM URL: http://www.serjux.com/smb4k/16/smb4k-1.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm this is just first version some errors will be find. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 --- Comment #12 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 09:47:36 EDT --- And for the GPL v3 in some software ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806536] Review Request: ghc-resourcet - Deterministic allocation and freeing of scarce resources
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806536 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||Ready -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806536] Review Request: ghc-resourcet - Deterministic allocation and freeing of scarce resources
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806536 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-haskell-list@redhat. ||com Blocks||805886 Alias||ghc-resourcet -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806536] New: Review Request: ghc-resourcet - Deterministic allocation and freeing of scarce resources
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ghc-resourcet - Deterministic allocation and freeing of scarce resources https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806536 Summary: Review Request: ghc-resourcet - Deterministic allocation and freeing of scarce resources Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: peter...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-resourcet/ghc-resourcet.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-resourcet/ghc-resourcet-0.3.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Allocate resources which are guaranteed to be released. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3929131 Needed for conduit 0.3. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806355] Review Request: python-django-profiles - A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806355
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 10:14:51 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[-]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST 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 %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: No licenses found! Please check the source files for licenses
manually.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint python-django-profiles-0.2-3.fc18.src.rpm
python-django-profiles.src: W: invalid-url Source0: django-profiles.tar.bz2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint python-django-profiles-0.2-3.fc18.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 10:21:43 EDT --- Hi, you should use python2-devel or python3-devel https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806516] Review Request: python-django-annoying - Eliminate annoying things in the Django framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806516 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@zarb.org Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 10:35:22 EDT --- Hi, - the new packaging policy seems to ask to have the version of python to be explicitely declared ( see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires ). The goal is to ease the transition to python3. - there is no license, and the policy requires that you ask to upstream to add it ( so i just remind you to do so :) ) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text Otherwise, there seems to be no problem, so I will start a formal review once the issue 1 have been fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 760594] Review Request: simcrs - C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760594 Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org 2012-03-24 10:35:31 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: simcrs Short Description: C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library Owners: denisarnaud Branches: f15 f16 f17 el5 el6 FAS username: denisarnaud -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806516] Review Request: python-django-annoying - Eliminate annoying things in the Django framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806516 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 10:40:59 EDT --- Oops, wrong flag -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783064] Review Request: python-omniORB - A robust high performance CORBA ORB for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783064 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@zarb.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 10:46:21 EDT --- Is this package planned to be sent to EPEL ? If not, can you : - remove BuildRoot - remove %defattr, %clean and the rm in %install For python, you need to say what version of python you need ( ie python2 or 3 ) for the buildRequires. You can also drop the snippet for python_sitelib, as they are now already set. The patch should have a mention of being sent upstream ( url, mail ). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 760594] Review Request: simcrs - C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760594 --- Comment #7 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org 2012-03-24 10:42:19 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: simcrs Short Description: C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library Owners: denisarnaud Branches: f15 f16 f17 el5 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806542] New: Review Request: php-channel-phpdoc - Adds phpdoc channel to PEAR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-channel-phpdoc - Adds phpdoc channel to PEAR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806542 Summary: Review Request: php-channel-phpdoc - Adds phpdoc channel to PEAR Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: chris...@damian.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://rpms.damian.net/SPECS/php-channel-phpdoc.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.damian.net/SRPMS/php-channel-phpdoc-1.3-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: This package adds the phpdoc channel which allows PEAR packages from this channel to be installed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 761319] Review Request: gtkd - It is a D binding and OO wrapper of GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=761319 Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #36 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 11:31:36 EDT --- You fixed all issues. rpmlint gives an explicit-lib-dependency errors but as you explained, rpm can't figure out the dependencies by itself. So I approve this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 11:38:59 EDT --- Ah, looks like rpmdev-newspec needs to be updated :/ Updated spec/srpm: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pycscope/pycscope.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pycscope/pycscope-0.3-2.fc16.src.rpm Thanks for pointing it out Michael, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 --- Comment #3 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 11:47:59 EDT --- I also forgot, are the 2 macros in the beginning still needed ? They are defined on my fedora 16, not sure about fedora 15. ( if not needed, i guess they can be removed ). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 --- Comment #13 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 11:49:28 EDT --- where ? All mentions to GPLv3 should have been removed by now. The only remaining files licensed under GPLv2 are related to cloud support (not enabled since it's scheduled to be rewritten for next release) but there's no incompatibility with CeCILL -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806355] Review Request: python-django-profiles - A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806355 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 11:51:43 EDT --- Thank you for your review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-django-profiles Short Description: A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django Owners: mrunge Branches: devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 781260] Review Request: leechcraft - A Free Open Source Cross-Platform Modular Internet-Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781260 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 12:34:23 EDT --- leechcraft-0.5.60-5.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/leechcraft-0.5.60-5.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kumarpraveen.nitdgp@gmail.c ||om AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kumarpraveen.nitdgp@gmail.c ||om Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 718681] Review Request: luajit - Just-In-Time Compiler for Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718681
--- Comment #20 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 12:47:51
EDT ---
A brief but hopefully helpful look at the spec file:
%package devel
Summary:Development files for %{name}
Group: System Environment/Libraries
Library -devel packages typically are in group Development/Libraries whereas
System Environment/Libraries is for the base library packages.
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
Requires: pkgconfig
This can be removed because it is automatic. Take a look at the built rpms with
rpm -qpR ...
%package static
Summary:Static library for %{name}
Group: System Environment/Libraries
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Same here as above, plus: It makes no sense for the -static package to require
the base package. If at all, it could require the -devel package.
%post devel -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun devel -p /sbin/ldconfig
The are not needed for the -devel package. There is nothing in the -devel
package that would be affected by running ldconfig. This is library base
package stuff.
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
This %defattr is the default and need not be specified anymore:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions
%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/jit/*
%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}
%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/jit
Strange order of lines. Due to the '*' wildcard, you could reduce these three
lines to just
%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/
to include that directory and everything in it properly.
%dir %{_libdir}/lua
%dir %{_libdir}/lua/5.1
%dir %{_datadir}/lua
%dir %{_datadir}/lua/5.1
Empty directories so far. Intentional? If so, a comment in the spec file would
be appropriate.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 --- Comment #14 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 13:02:53 EDT --- In the man pages $ grep -r GPL . ./doc/man/dietForwarder.1:License: GPLv3 ./doc/man/maDagAgent.1:License: GPLv3+ ./doc/man/dietAgent.1:License: GPLv3+ But since that's IIRC compatible with cecill, I guess that's not a huge problem, so I will finish the review ( or restart, if I cannot find where I placed the file ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517
--- Comment #4 from Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com 2012-03-24
13:20:39 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST 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 %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint -i pycscope.spec ../SRPMS/pycscope-0.3-2.fc16.src.rpm
../RPMS/noarch/pycscope-0.3-2.fc16.noarch.rpm
pycscope.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cscope - scope, c scope, cs
cope
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
pycscope.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cscope - scope, c scope,
cs cope
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
pycscope.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cscope - scope, c scope, cs
cope
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
pycscope.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cscope - scope, c
scope, cs cope
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
pycscope.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pycscope.py
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
looks like source doesn't contain manual information.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/daredevil/rpmbuild/SOURCES/pycscope-0.3.tar.gz
MD5SUM this package : ec83c70bce31909cb3cdeae233c00374
MD5SUM upstream package : ec83c70bce31909cb3cdeae233c00374
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 --- Comment #15 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 13:18:34 EDT --- My bad, man pages were not regenerated (it is fixed in restructured text sources), i'll fix this later if it doesn't block the review -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 --- Comment #5 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 13:23:03 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) I also forgot, are the 2 macros in the beginning still needed ? They are defined on my fedora 16, not sure about fedora 15. ( if not needed, i guess they can be removed ). Agh, another thing rpmdev-newspec put in. I'll get rid of it! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799702] Review Request: python-ufl - A compiler for finite element variational forms
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799702
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@zarb.org
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@zarb.org
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 13:30:21 EDT ---
Hi,
- the source code say that the code is under LGPL v3+ , so the license Tag need
to be fixed ( it say GPLv3+ ).
- there seems to be tests, have you tried to enable them in %check ?
- %{_mandir}/man1/*.gz should not hardcode the extension, as this could change
later ( like xz, bz2, etc ). Better use .*
- rm -rf %{buildroot} is no longer needed in %install since a few version of
Fedora.
Once this is fixed, i will start the formal review.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071
--- Comment #16 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-24 13:41:03 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[X]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[X]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[X]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[X]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: The package did not built BR could therefore not be checked or the
package failed to build because of missing BR
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST 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 %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
Package has no sources or they are generated by developer
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
Generated by fedora-review 0.1.3
External plugins:
$ rpmlint *
diet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware - middle ware,
middle-ware, middleweight
diet.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
[Bug 800756] Review Request: infinispan - Data grid platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800756 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 13:42:58 EDT --- infinispan-5.1.2-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 --- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 13:45:11 EDT --- Updated spec/srpm: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pycscope/pycscope.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pycscope/pycscope-0.3-3.fc16.src.rpm * Sat Mar 24 2012 Ankur Sinha ankursinha AT fedoraproject DOT org 0.3-3 - Removed rm commands https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517#c4 Thanks, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799651] Review Request: smb4k-1.0.1 - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799651 Sergio Monteiro Basto ser...@serjux.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: smb4k-1.0.1 |smb4k-0.10.12 - The |- The SMB/CIFS Share |SMB/CIFS Share Browser for |Browser for KDE |KDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517
Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com 2012-03-24
13:52:16 EDT ---
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Issues:
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
looks good
APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 13:58:06 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pycscope Short Description: Generates a cscope index of Python source trees Owners: ankursinha Branches: f15 f16 f17 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #17 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:03:32 EDT --- Thanks for reviewing this package ! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: diet Short Description: A computational servers toolkit Owners: hguemar Branches: f15 f16 f17 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 547621] Review Request: django-googlecharts - A suite of template tags for Django to assist in generating charts using Google's Chart API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547621 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de Resolution||INSUFFICIENT_DATA Flag|needinfo?(acturneruk@gmail. | |com)| Last Closed||2012-03-24 14:15:59 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 606003] Review Request: pypolicyd-spf - SPF Policy Server for Postfix
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606003 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||INSUFFICIENT_DATA Last Closed||2012-03-24 14:19:39 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 578024] Review Request: ingres - Relational DBMS Server and Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578024 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||INSUFFICIENT_DATA Last Closed||2012-03-24 14:17:17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 631972] Review Request: plone3 - Plone CMS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=631972 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||INSUFFICIENT_DATA Last Closed||2012-03-24 14:24:12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613766] Review Request: python-xlwt - Library to generate files compatible with Microsoft Excel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613766 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de --- Comment #10 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 14:22:28 EDT --- Any progress here? I'd close this request, if there's no answer during the next month. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608512] Review Request: python-anyvc - Python library to access different version control system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608512 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de Status Whiteboard||Stalled Submitter Bug 608512 depends on bug 652034, which changed state. Bug 652034 Summary: Review Request: python-apipkg - Python namespace control and lazy-import mechanism https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652034 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #4 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 14:23:12 EDT --- Any progress? Fabian, are you still interested? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 633634] Review Request: python-zope-filerepresentation - File-system Representation Interfaces
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=633634 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de --- Comment #7 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 14:26:20 EDT --- Any progress here? Robin, are you still interested? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 633333] Review Request: iosum - An I/O bandwidth and syscall summarizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=63 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de Resolution||INSUFFICIENT_DATA Last Closed||2012-03-24 14:25:12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 635086] Review Request: python-zope-datetime - Zope datetime utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=635086 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de --- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 14:27:39 EDT --- Any progress here? Robin, are you still interested? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 645321] Review Request: python-orange - Orange data mining library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=645321 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de Status Whiteboard||Stalled Submitter --- Comment #9 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 14:30:42 EDT --- Any progress here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683638] Review Request: pyes- Python library for connecting to and managing Elasticsearch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683638 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||Stalled Submitter --- Comment #6 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 14:36:01 EDT --- Any progress here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672205] Review Request: pynag - Python Nagios plugin and configuration environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672205 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||Stalled Submitter --- Comment #9 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 14:34:27 EDT --- Any progress? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 760594] Review Request: simcrs - C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760594 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:41:01 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783071] Review Request: diet - A computational servers toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783071 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:41:41 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798202] Review Request: python-ldappool - A connection pool for python-ldap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798202 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:42:43 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806355] Review Request: python-django-profiles - A fairly simple user-profile management application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806355 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:45:27 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806299] Review Request: python-django-registration - A user-registration application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806299 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:44:20 EDT --- Summary name and SCM request name don't match, please correct. Since it's a rename review I want to be sure I get this right. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 645321] Review Request: python-orange - Orange data mining library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=645321 --- Comment #10 from Howard Ning mrlhwlibe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:45:34 EDT --- There is no progress on my side. I don't know how to strip the libsvm out of the source code without major hac. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806517] Review Request: pycscope - Generates a cscope index of Python source trees
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806517 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:46:13 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806516] Review Request: python-django-annoying - Eliminate annoying things in the Django framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806516 --- Comment #3 from Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:48:46 EDT --- Updated to upstream about license file, waiting for response. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 806299] Review Request: python-django-registration - A user-registration application for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806299 Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 14:51:32 EDT --- ah my mistake.. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-django-registration Short Description: A user-registration application for Django Owners: kumarpraveen Branches: devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 704445] Review Request: python-timelib - Parse english textual date descriptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704445 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de Status Whiteboard||Stalled Submitter --- Comment #7 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 15:00:48 EDT --- Any progress here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 426529] Review Request: perl-Array-Diff - Diff two arrays
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426529 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:04:02 EDT --- perl-Array-Diff-0.07-7.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797930] Review Request: pgtune - PostgreSQL Config Tuner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797930 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|pgtune-0.9.3-3.fc16 |pgtune-0.9.3-3.el6 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:04:43 EDT --- pgtune-0.9.3-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797930] Review Request: pgtune - PostgreSQL Config Tuner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797930 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|pgtune-0.9.3-3.el6 |pgtune-0.9.3-4.el5 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:06:01 EDT --- pgtune-0.9.3-4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 598860] Review Request: httpd-itk - MPM Itk for Apache HTTP Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598860 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|httpd-itk-2.2.22-5.fc16 |httpd-itk-2.2.22-5.el6 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:04:14 EDT --- httpd-itk-2.2.22-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 219957] Review Request: perl-Pod-Strip - Remove POD from Perl code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=219957 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:06:32 EDT --- perl-Pod-Strip-1.02-11.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 485207] Review Request: perl-Test-Assert - Assertion methods for those who like JUnit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485207 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:04:32 EDT --- perl-Test-Assert-0.0504-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 239199] Review Request: perl-Archive-Any - Single interface to deal with file archives
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239199 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:03:38 EDT --- perl-Archive-Any-0.0932-9.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 735160] Review Request: django-socialregistration - Django application enabling registration through a variety of APIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735160 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de --- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-03-24 15:03:08 EDT --- Rahul, are you going to review this package? It is assigned to you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 483079] Review Request: perl-constant-boolean - Define TRUE and FALSE constants
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483079 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:10:53 EDT --- perl-constant-boolean-0.02-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797740] Review Request: z80asm - Assembler for Z80 microprocessor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797740 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|z80asm-1.8-1.fc16 |z80asm-1.8-2.el6 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:09:30 EDT --- z80asm-1.8-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798681] Review Request: python-pyotp - Python One Time Password library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798681 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-pyotp-1.3.1-1.fc16 |python-pyotp-1.3.1-1.el6 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:10:37 EDT --- python-pyotp-1.3.1-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783064] Review Request: python-omniORB - A robust high performance CORBA ORB for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783064 --- Comment #2 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-24 15:09:21 EDT --- Yes I plan to push this into EPEL5+ (since omniORB is already there). I fixed the BR (didn't know that EL5 python already provided python2), python_sitelib is only defined for EL5. A mail has been sent to the maintainer for both omniORB and python-omniORB about the FSF address issue, a comment was added. new spec and src.rpm: Spec URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/diet/python-omniORB.spec SRPM URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/diet/python-omniORB-3.6-1.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 588122] Review Request: perl-Symbol-Util - Additional utilities for Perl symbols manipulation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588122 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-24 15:11:40 EDT --- perl-Symbol-Util-0.0202-8.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
